;    mm 

^ 

[gl^j^JM^lM^IM^M 


i 
1 
1 
1 
1 


THE  LIBRARIES 

COLUMBIA  UNIVERSITY 


I 

1 

1 
1 
1 
1 
1 

i 
1 
1 

g]ifg[iüaip[ja[rüiirföTi^ 


A   ^^ 


A  N  T  I  -  J  A  N  U  S. 


PRINTED  BY  W.   B.   KELLY,  8  GRAFTON  STREET,  DUBLIN. 


ANTI-JANUS: 


AN  HISTORICO-THEOLOGICAL  CRITICISM  OF  THE  WORK, 


ENTITLED 


THE  POPE  AND  THE  COUNCIL," 
By  JANUS.  • 


BY 

Dr  UERGENRÖTHER,  a/^-z^nS^  QvJl 


PROFESSOR  OF  CANON  LAW  AND  OF  ECCLESIASTICAL  HISTORY  AT  THE 
UNIVERSITY  OF  WÜRZBURG. 

Author  of  tJie  '■''Life,  Writings,  and  Times  of  the  Patriarch  PJiotius. 


TRANSLATED  FROM  THE  GERMAN 


J.  B.  ROBERTSON,  Esq., 

PROFESSOR  OF  MODERN  HISTORY  AND  ENGLISH  LITERATURE  AT  THE 
CATHOLIC  UNIVERSITY,  DUBLIN, 

Author  of '''  Lectures  on  Modern  History  and  Secret  Societies" 

Life  and  Times  of  Edtnutid  Burke,"  Translator  of  Mohier's  ''^Symbolism, 

and  of  Schlegel' s  "  Lectiires  on  the  Philosophy  of  History." 


WITH  AN  INTRODUCTION  BY  HIM, 

GIVING  A  HISTORY  OF  GALLICANISM  FROM  THE  REIGN  OF  LOUIS  XIV 
DOWN  TO  THE  PRESENT  TIME. 


DUBLIN: 
W.    B.    KELLY,    8    GRAFTON    STREET. 

LONDON  :  BURNS,  DATES,  &  COMPANY  ; 

AND  SIMPKIN,  MARSHALL,  &  CO. 

NEW  YORK:  THE  CATHOLIC  PUBLISHING  SOCIETY, 

9  WARREN  STREET. 

'  1870. 


To 

The  Very  Rev.  Dr  Rzcssell, 

President  of  Si  Patrick^  s  College,  Maynooth, 

%^\^  translation 

Is  inscribed^ 

Asa  ?nark  of  personal  regard.^ 

As  a 

Slight  toke?i  oj  admiration  for  his  virtues  and  talents^  and  of 

thankfulness  for  many  acts  of  kind?iess  received, 

by  his  obliged  Friend, 

THE  TRANSLATOR. 


3)4  r 


^^sf^y/ 


V. 


CONTENTS, 


CHAP.  PAGE 

translator's  introduction,  ...  V 

NOTES  TO  INTRODUCTION,  .  .  .  .  xlv 

I.    THE   FIVE   ARTICLES    IN    THE    "ALLGEMEINE   ZEITUNG,"      I 
II.    THE    FIVE   ARTICLES    IN   THE   "AUGSBURG   GAZETTE," 

AND   THEIR   NEW   EDITION,    .                 .                 .                 .  I5 

III.  MAKING  THE   SYLLABUS    DOGMATIC,     .                .                .  27 

IV.  THE    DOCTRINE   OF   PAPAL   INFALLIBILITY,       .                 .  50 
V.    ALLEGED  ERRORS  AND  CONTRADICTIONS  OF  THE  POPES,  74 

VI.  THE   PRIMACY   AND   THE    PAPACY,           .                .                 .94 

VII.  THE   PRIMACY  AND   ITS   DEVELOPMENT,            .                .         I08 

VIII.  ROMAN    FORGERIES,         .....         I44 

IX.  A  GLANCE  AT   COUNCILS,             .                .                .                .         186 

X.  IHE   POPEDOM    IN    HISTORY,       .                 .                 .                 .217 

XI.  THE   CHURCH,   THE   DOGMA,   AND   THE    NEW   COUNCIL,     24O 

XII.  THE   RESULTS   OF  JANUS,             ....        263 

APPENDIX,  .  .  .  .  .  .        2S7 


INTRODUCTION. 

BY  THE  TRANSLATOR. 


|HE  German  work,  of  which  an  English 
translation  is  here  offered  to  the  public, 
appeared  about  six  months  ago.  Its 
author  is  Professor  of  Ecclesiastical  His- 
tory and  Canon  Law  at  the  University  of  Würz- 
burg, in  Bavaria,  and  has  earned  a  great  repu- 
tation by  a  most  learned  and  elaborate  history 
of  the  life,  writings,  and  times  of  the  founder  of 
the  Greek  schism,  the  Patriarch  Photius.  Dr 
Hergenrother  was  one  of  the  German  divines  who, 
at  the  invitation  of  his  Holiness  Pope  Pius  IX., 
took  part  in  the  preparatory  labours  of  one  of  the 
theological  Commissions,  that  preceded  the  assem- 
bling of  the  present  CEcumenical  Council.  The 
work  now  presented  to  the  British  public,  I  leave 
to  the  appreciation  of  the  reader.  But  I  think  the 
Catholics  of  these  countries  will  agree  that,  with 
the  exception,  perhaps,  of  some  writings  of  Father 
Bottalla,  no  treatise  in  our  language  contains  such 
a  mass  of  patristic  evidence  for  the  prerogatives  of 
the  Papacy.  The  doctrine  of  Papal  Infallibility, 
which,  at  the  time  the  author  wrote  this  Reply  to 
Janus,  was  not  yet  defined  as  a  dogma,  is  here 
rather  defended  against  the  captious  objections  of 

a 


ii  Introditction. 

that  book,  than  put  forward  in  its  full  objective 
truth.  It  is,  however,  more  or  less  implied  through- 
out his  work.  But  his  main  concern,  besides  a  de- 
fence of  the  rights  and  prerogatives  of  the  Holy 
See,  is  the  refutation  of  the  many  historical  mis- 
representations and  calumnies,  which  his  adversary 
has  poured  forth  against  the  Papacy.  He  tracks 
him  through  his  long  labyrinth  of  falsehood  and 
sophistry,  exposes  his  many  inconsistencies,  places 
in  a  true  light  the  facts  he  has  misrepresented,  and 
shows  how  his  fanatical  attacks  on  Papal  Infalli- 
bility recoil  on  the  doctrine  of  Papal  Supremacy, 
which  he  professes  to  believe,  and  even  on  the 
authority  of  the  Church  herself. 

In  the  Latin,  French,  German,  and  Italian  lan- 
guages, there  are  classical  works  in  defence  of  the 
dogma  of  Papal  Infallibility.  But  such  a  mass  of 
historical  objections,  supported  by  such  an  array 
of  learning  as  Janus,  however  confusedly,  has 
brought  to  bear  upon  this  doctrine,  required  a 
special  refutation.  And  such  it  has  found  in  the 
present  work  ;  and  as  this  is  its  peculiar  feature, 
so  it  will  impart  to  this  production,  I  think,  a  per- 
manent interest.  In  the  execution  of  his  task,  the 
author  has  displayed  a  rare  acuteness  of  mind,  as 
well  as  an  extraordinary  acquaintance  with  the 
fathers,  the  schoolmen,  the  canon  law,  and  the 
records  of  civil  and  ecclesiastical  history. 

Of  Janus  it  is  needless  to  speak.  Severely  cen- 
sured by  all  the  German  prelates  assembled  last 
year  at  Fulda,  and  placed  on  the  Roman  Index,  it 
has  called  forth  the  reprobation,  and  excited  the 
disgust,  of  all  true  Catholics.  It  is  not  only  a 
schismatical,  but  an  heretical,  and,  in  some  re- 
spects, even  an  impious  book.  It  has  nothing,  in- 
deed, so  shockingly  outrageous  as  the  declaration 
of  the  old  Protestant  Book  of  Homihes,  "  That  for 


IntrodtLciion,  iii 

eight  hundred  years  Christendom  was  plunged  in 
damnable  idolatry."  But  is  it  much  less  impious 
to  say  with  Janus,  that  though  Christ  our  Lord 
founded  a  Church,  and  instituted  a  visible  Head, 
and  promised,  ''  That  the  Holy  Spirit  should  abide 
with  that  Church  for  ever,  and  lead  her  into  all 
truth  ;"  yet  that,  in  despite  of  that  solemn  promise, 
"  the  action  of  the  head  had  paralysed  the  body, 
that  that  head  had  become  a  choking  excrescence," 
and  thus  the  designs  of  the  Divine  Founder  of  the 
Church  had  been  frustrated  ?  In  despite  of  the 
promise  of  the  perpetual  indwelhng  of  the  Holy 
Spirit,  the  old  Jansenistic  theory  of  an  obscuration 
prevalent  in  the  Church  for  many  centuries,  has 
been  revived  by  this  writer. 

It  would  be  too  painful  to  believe  that  a  cele- 
brated scholar  and  divine,  who  has  rendered  such 
eminent  services  to  religion,  should,  in  his  old  age, 
have  taken  part  in  a  work  so  scandalous  and  afflict- 
ing to  all  Catholics.  Strong  as  the  circumstantial 
evidence  is  said  to  be  as  to  his  share  in  the  author- 
ship of  this  odious  book,  and  blamable  as  are 
some  of  his  acknowledged  recent  writings,  savour- 
ing too  much  of  the  spirit  of  Janus  ;  yet,  as  long  as 
it  is  possible,  I  would  fain  acquit  him  of  the  charge. 
His  culpable  silence  under  the  grave  imputation 
has  been  censured  by  one  of  the  most  eminent 
prelates  of  Germany,  Dr  Ketteler,  Bishop  of  May- 
ence  ;  and  the  Archbishop  of  Cologne  has  declared 
that  not  a  single  German  bishop  approves  of  his 
late  proceedings.  How  different  a  position  did  he 
occupy  in  1848,  when,  with  the  sanction  of  the 
whole  German  prelacy,  he  defended,  in  the  Parlia- 
ment assembled  at  Frankfort,  the  interests  of 
religion  and  of  social  order  ! 

During  my  abode  in  Germany  I  had  the  honour 
of  his  acquaintance  ;  and,  like  others,  I  found  him  a 


Iv  Introduction, 

most  kind-hearted  man  and  an  excellent  clergyman. 
He  was  then  one  of  an  illustrious  group  of  writers, 
such  as  Gorres,   Mohler   (too  soon,   alas!  carried 
off),  Phillips,  Jarcke,  Windischmann,  Moy,  Höfler, 
Arndts,  Hermann  Müller,  the  younger  Gorres,  and 
others,  carrying  on  a  great  historical  and  political 
periodical,  the  noblest  in  Germany,  and  which  our 
Protestant  Quarterly  Review  once  called  ''  a  most 
powerful   journal " — I   mean  the  Historisch-Poli- 
tische Blatter  of  Munich.     Most  of  its  then  contri- 
butors are  now  no  more  ;  but  all  their  survivors, 
except   himself,    have  remained    faithful   to   their 
religious  and  political  principles  ;  while  the  journal 
itself,  as  I  am  informed,  retains  its  pure  Catholic 
spirit,   as  well   as  high  literary  reputation.     The 
clergyman  I  speak  of,  is  not,  and  never  was,  what 
his  flatterers  call  him,  "the  first  theologian  of  the 
age ;"  for  he  has  not  the  philosophic  cast  of  mind 
necessary  to  constitute  a  theologian  of  the  highest 
order.     But  he  is,  nevertheless,  a  writer  of  great 
sagacity,  wonderful  critical  acumen,  and  vast  and 
varied  learning.     Let  us  hope  and  pray  that  he 
will  remain  true  to  the  Church,  and  to  the  princi- 
ples he  for  so  many  years  professed,  and  that  he 
will  not  be  of  the  number  of  those  who,  in  the 
evening  of  life,  forfeit,  alas  !  the  hard-earned  wages 
of  their  morning  and  their  noonday  toil ! 

It  did  not  enter  into  the  plan  of  the  author  of 
the  present  work  to  treat  the  doctrine  of  Papal 
Infallibility  in  its  practical  bearings.  Nor  in  the 
many  letters  and  pamphlets  which  this  question 
has  recently  called  forth,  or  which  at  least  have 
fallen  under  my  notice,  does  this  part  of  the  sub- 
ject seem  to  have  been  discussed.  And  as  many 
Protestants  believe,  that  by  the  recent  Definition 
of  the  Vatican  Council,  the  liberty  of  particular 
Churches  will  be  seriously  restricted;  and  as  some 


Introduction.  v 

ill-informed  Catholics  have  a  vague  apprehension 
on  that  head  ;  it  will  be  my  object,  in  the  first  part 
of  this  Introduction,  to  show  the  freedom  which 
what  is  called  the  Ultramontane  system  insures  to 
all  Churches,  and,  on  the  contrary,  the  heav}^ 
servitude  which  the  Galilean  error  imposes  on 
those  ecclesiastical  communities  which  have  ac- 
cepted it  This  fact  I  will  illustrate  by  a  rapid 
sketch  of  the  state  oi  the  French  Church  in  the 
eighteenth  century. 

In  the  second  part,  I  will  endeavour  to  trace  the 
various  causes  that  produced,  in  the  early  part  of 
this  century,  the  anti-Gallican  reaction,  the  gra- 
dual renovation  of  opinion  which  then  ensued  in 
the  Church  of  France,  and  which,  under  the  direction 
of  the  Holy  Spirit,  has  been  so  instrumental  in 
bringing  about  that  Definition  of  Papal  inerrancy, 
that  has  carried  consolation  and  gladness  from 
the  centre  to  the  remotest  parts  of  the  Church. 

I.  The  Papacy  is  a  central,  but  not  a  centralizing 
institution.  It  tolerates  a  variety  of  customs, 
usages,  and  privileges  in  local  churches  ;  and  even 
where  there  is  an  imperious  necessity,  or  there  has 
been  a  long  prescription,  it  admits  a  diversity  of 
rites  and  languages  in  the  celebration  of  the  liturgy 
itself.  Its  object  is  to  give  to  national  churches  as 
much  freedom  as  is  compatible  with  the  preser- 
vation of  religious  unity.  Hence  the  Holy  See 
encourages  the  annual  meeting  of  diocesan  synods, 
and  the  periodical  celebration  of  provincial  councils. 
It  is  the  vigilant  guardian  of  all  ecclesiastical  rights, 
whether  of  the  bishops,  or  of  the  inferior  clergy, 
secular  and  regular.  It  ever  strenuously  resists 
the  encroachments  of  the  civil  power  on  the 
spiritual  rights  and  jurisdiction  of  the  bishops,  as 
well  as  on  their  temporal  privileges  and  property. 
The  religious  liberties  of  the  sovereign  Pontiff,  of 


VI  introduction. 

the  bishops,  the  inferior  clergy,  and  of  the  laity, 
are  all  indissolubly  bound  up  together. 

''  The  Catholic  Church,"  as  Cardinal  Bellarmine 
observes,  "  is  not  an  absolute  monarchy,  but  one 
tempered  by  aristocracy  and  democracy."  "  The 
Papal  power,"  says  the  eminent  German  canonist, 
Professor  Walter,  whose  work  on  ecclesiastical 
jurisprudence  is  much  approved  of  at  Rome — ''the 
Papal  power  is  by  no  means  absolute  and  arbitrary 
in  its  exercise,  but  on  all  sides  bound  and  attem- 
pered by  the  spirit  and  the  practice  of  the  Church, 
by  the  consciousness  of  the  duties  annexed  to  Pon- 
tifical rights,  by  respect  for  CEcumenical  Councils, 
by  regard  for  ancient  observances  and  customs, 
by  the  mild  forms  of  the  ecclesiastical  government, 
by  the  recognized  rights  of  the  Episcopate,  by  the 
consequent  distribution  of  functions,  by  the  rela- 
tions with  the  secular  powers ;  lastly,  by  the  spirit 
of  nations.*  "  So  the  constitution  of  the  Catholic 
Church  leaves  no  room  for  the  exercise  of  arbi- 
trary power.  Where  the  canons  are  in  force,  and 
except  in  cases  of  extreme  emergency,  the  Pope 
cannot  deprive  a  bishop  of  his  see,  nor  the  bishop 
a  rector  of  his  cure,  without  a  regular  canonical 
trial.  Thus  not  only  does  the  Church  in  regard 
to  the  State  preserve  her  spiritual  autonomy;  but 
all  the  orders  of  her  hierarchy  freely  move  in  their 
respective  spheres,  and  guided  by  a  central  power, 
act  in  harmonious  co-operation.  When  heresy 
strives  to  disturb  that  harmony,  the  Holy  Spirit, 
that  watches  over  the  Church,  soon  banishes  dis- 
cord from  her  bosom. 

But  let  that  great  central  authority,  here  spoken 
of,  be  once  weakened  ;  then  immediately  disorder 
and  perturbation  arise  in  the  Church.  If  the  doc- 
trinal Infallibility  of  the  Holy  See  be  once  denied 
*  Manuel  du  Droit  ecclesiastique,  Trad.  Frangaise,  p.  1 70. 


Introduction.  vii 

in  any  portion  of  the  Church,  there  its  action  be- 
comes enfeebled,  and  the  whole  framework  of  that 
local  church  becomes  more  or  less  disjointed.  If 
the  prelates  and  the  clergy  of  the  second  order  take 
up  an  attitude  of  critical  distrust  towards  the 
bishop  of  bishops,  then  the  laity  gradually  lose 
much  of  their  reverence  for  the  Apostolic  See,  and 
for  the  Episcopate  itself;  and  civil  governments 
assail  the  spiritual  rights  of  both.  For  there  is  a 
close  inter-communion  between  the  mother  and 
the  daughters — between  the  Roman  and  the  sub- 
ject churches. 

The  truth  of  the  remarks  here  made  received  a 
sad  illustration  in  the  history  of  the  Galilean 
Church  during  the  eighteenth  century.  The  French 
Episcopate  of  that  age  displayed,  on  the  whole,  a 
loyal  devotion  to  the  Holy  See;  and  this  is  the 
main  reason,  as  the  distinguished  Archbishop  of 
Malines  well  observes,  why  the  Galilean  error  was 
so  long  tolerated,  or  at  least  remained  without 
express  censure.  The  real  representatives  of  Gal- 
licanism  were  the  magistrates,  or  the  members  of 
the  French  Parliaments.  These,  imbued  with  the 
despotic  principles  of  the  Roman  jurisprudence, 
and  partially  tainted  with  Jansenism,  sought  by 
every  means,  whether  by  chicanery  or  by  violence, 
to  domineer  over  the  Church  of  France.  In  the 
Articles  of  the  Assembly  of  1682,  subscribed 
by  a  minority  of  French  bishops,  they  found  a 
weapon  ready-made  to  their  hands.  Even  in  the 
reign  of  Louis  XIV,,  who  kept  this  corporation  in 
check,  Bossuet  had  occasion  to  say,  "  That  the 
magistrates  understood  the  maxims  of  the  Church 
of  France  in  a  sense  very  different  from  her 
bishops."  *    Fleury,  a  still  more  ardent  stickler  for 

*  Vie  de  Bossuet  par  Cardinal  Bausset,  vol.  iv.     Lettre  au  Car- 
dinal d'Estrees,  Decembre  1681. 


vIII  Introduction, 

those  opinions,  and  who  long  survived  the  Bishop 
of  Meaux,  lived  to  confess,  ''That  the  liberties  of 
the  Gallican  Church  had  better  be  called  its  servi- 
tudes." *  And  Fenelon,  ever  strongly  opposed  to 
the  Gallican  system,  ventured  even  to  say,  "  That, 
in  his  time,  the  King  of  France  was  nearly  as  much 
master  of  the  Church  in  that  kingdom,  as  the  King 
of  England  of  the  Anglican  communion."  f  And 
though  this  expression  is  doubtless  hyperbolical ; 
yet  it  shows  to  what  fearful  lengths  the  civil  power 
had  already  carried  its  encroachments  ! 

The  recent  work  of  M.  Gerin  \  has  thrown  great 
light  on  all  the  transactions  which  preceded, 
accompanied,  and  followed  the  Ecclesiastical  As- 
sembly of  1682.  We  there  see  what  artifices  and 
intimidation  the  French  Government  resorted  to  in 
order  to  bring  about  a  declaration,  designed  to 
humble  the  Sovereign  Pontiff,  and  to  insure  to 
the  State  a  certain  domination  over  the  Church. 
The  great  Bossuet,  who  took  a  prominent  part  in 
this  Assembly,  was,  in  the  course  he  pursued,  in- 
fluenced by  motives  of  a  twofold  kind.  On  the 
one  hand,  he  feared  to  incur  the  displeasure  of 
Louis  XIV.  ;  for  this  great  man,  with  all  his  virtues 
and  genius,  had  (as  the  Abbe  de  la  Mennais  once 
said),  a  certain  courtly  weakness, — ''  une  certaine 
faiblesse  de  cour;"§  and,  on  the  other  hand,  he 
dreaded  to  see  the  Church  of  France,  through  the 
violence  of  some  prelates,  like  the  Bishop  of 
Tournai,  precipitated   into  a  schism.     Under  the 

*  Les  Opuscules  de  Fleury. 

+  Lettre  de  Fenelon,  cited  by  the  Abbe  de  la  Mennais  in  his  work 
entitled,  ''  De  la  Relio:ion  consideree  dans  ses  rapports  avec  I'ordre 
civil  et  politique."  Elsewhere  he  says,  "  In  France  the  King  is 
practically  more  head  of  the  Church  than  the  Pope,"  CEuvres,  t. 
xxii.,  p.  586. 

X  L'Assembl^e  de  1682.     Par  M.  Charles  Gerin.     Paris,  1869. 

^  See  Note  A. 


Introdiiciion.  ix 

influence  of  these  diverse  motives,  he  steered  a 
middle  course  between  the  doctrine  of  Papal 
inerrancy  on  the  one  hand,  and  the  dangler  of 
a  schismatical  rupture  with  the  Holy  See  on  the 
other. 

Since  the  times  of  the  Council  of  Constance, 
the  opinion  as  to  the  superiority  of  the  Council 
over  the  Pope  had  been  occasionally  ventilated  in 
the  schools  of  the  Sorbonne.  This  opinion  was 
not  shared  by  the  majority  of  the  Episcopate, 
and  by  the  great  body  of  the  clergy.  This  is 
proved  by  the  numerous  assemblies  of  the  P>ench 
clergy  in  1626,  1653,  and  1654,  where  the  inerranc}- 
of  the  dogmatic  decisions  of  the  Holy  See  was 
solemnly  proclaimed.  Cardinal  Duperron  de- 
fended Papal  Infallibility  against  a  doctor  of  the 
Sorbonne,  Edmund  Richer,  who  went  so  far  as  to 
say,  that  the  Pope  was  a  mere  ministerial  head 
of  the  Church,  and  that  to  the  whole  Church, 
and  even  to  the  laity,  was  committed,  by  the 
ordinance  of  Christ,  the  power  of  the  keys.  When 
Richer  himself  expressed  his  willingness  to  re- 
tract his  heterodox  opinions,  he  was  required  b\' 
Cardinal  Richelieu  to  acknowledge  not  only  the 
supremacy,  but  the  infallibility  of  the  Holy  See 
in  matters  of  faith. 

The  Declaration  of  1682  was  not  passed  unani- 
mously by  the  twenty-six  bishops  assembled  on 
the  occasion.*  It  was  opposed,  too,  by  many  of 
the  bishops  and  of  the  dignified  clergy  throughout 
the  kingdom,  as  well  as  by  the  various  theological 
Faculties,  including  the  far  greater  part  of  the 
doctors  of  the  Sorbonne,  and  the  most  pious  and 
learned  divines.  From  all  the  bishops  and  priests, 
who  had  taken  part  in  this  assembly,  and  who  were 

*  The  great  Fenelon  and  the  learned  oratorian  Thomassin,  by 
their  writings,  opposed  the  Declaration. 


X  Inircduciiofi. 

afterwards  nominated  or  promoted  to  episcopal 
sees,  Pope  Innocent  XL  before  he  would  give 
them  institution,  required  a  retractation  of  their 
acts.  Pope  Alexander  VIII.,  in  his  last  ill- 
ness, summoned  the  cardinals  around  him,  called 
Heaven  to  witness  that  he  protested  against  the 
Declaration  of  1682,  and  pronounced  its  articles 
null  and  void.  At  the  same  time  the  Churches 
of  Spain  and  of  Hungary  put  forth  most  energetic 
protests  against  the  same  Declaration. 

After  the  lapse  often  years,  Louis  XIV.  made  his 
peace  with  the  Holy  See,  and  suspended  the  execu- 
tion of  the  obnoxious  edict,  whereby  he  had  made  it 
incumbent  on  all  Professors  of  Theology  in  his  king- 
dom to  subscribe  the  Four  Articles.  Bossuet,  in  the 
meantime,  was  constantly  engaged  in  retouching  his 
defence  of  the  Declaration  of  1682,  entitled  *' De- 
fensio  Declarationis  Cleri  Gallicani,"  and  in  making 
the  work  approximate  more  to  the  Roman  doc- 
trines. In  his  last  illness,  he  enjoined  his  executors 
never  to  let  the  book  be  published.  But  this 
injunction  was  violated  by  his  Jansenist  nephew, 
the  Abbe  Bossuet,  who,  twenty-six  years  after  his 
uncle's  death,  brought  out  the  work  ;  and,  as  Dr 
Ddllinger  thinks  highly  probable,*  suppressed  the 
various  emendations  which  his  great  relative  had 
from  time  to  time  made. 

On  the  death  of  Louis  XIV.,  however,  the 
above-named  edict,  whose  execution  had  been 
suspended  by  that  monarch,  was  revived  by  the 
Government  of  the  Regent  Philip,  and  strictly 
enforced  by  the  Parliaments.  Henceforth  the 
Four  Galilean  Articles  became  a  terrible  engine 
of  oppression  against  the  Church  of  France. 
We  have  heard  the  complaints,  which,  even  in  the 
reign  of  Louis  XIV.,  Bossuet,  and  Fleury,  and 
*  See  Kirchen-Lexicon,  art.  Bossuet,  Freiburg,  1850. 


hitroduciion.  xi 

Fenelon  had  made  of  those  articles,  as  most  sub- 
versive of  the  freedom  of  the  GaUican  Church. 
If  such  had  been  the  language  of  those  great 
men  even  at  that  time,  what  words  would  have 
expressed  their  sorrow  and  indignation,  could 
they  have  beheld  the  workings  of  the  Gallican 
system,  and  the  evils  it  entailed  on  the  Church 
of  France  during  the  eighteenth  century  !  What 
a  sense  of  grief  and  shame  would  have  over- 
powered them,  could  they  have  beheld  Episcopal 
charges  and  Papal  bulls  burned  in  the  name  of 
the  Gallican  liberties  by  the  hands  of  the  public 
executioner,  and  at  the  bidding  of  the  Paris  Par- 
liament !  Nay,  more,  the  orthodox  clergy  forced 
by  the  mandates  of  that  body  to  carry  amid  a 
guard  of  soldiers  the  last  Sacraments  to  the  dying 
Jansenists !  What,  too,  would  have  been  their 
feelings,  could  they  have  beheld  the  facility  with 
which,  entrenched  behind  these  Four  Articles, 
Jansenism  so  long  eluded  the  censures  of  the 
Holy  See,  and  defied  the  authority  of  the  bishops  ! 
In  the  course  of  the  last  century,  the  Jansenists, 
while  they  kept  more  out  of  view  their  peculiar 
doctrines  on  Grace,  were  distinguished  for  the 
craftiness,  as  well  as  violence,  wherewith  they 
resisted  the  ecclesiastical  authorities.  And  in 
this  warfare  they  found  a  weapon  ready  furnished 
to  their  hands  in  the  Gallican  maxims.  Hence 
an  eminent  prelate,  Mgr.  Gerbet,  in  his  early  days, 
once  observed  to  me,  *'  That  it  is  very  diffi- 
cult to  know  where  Gallicanism  ends,  and 
where  Jansenism  begins  ;"  and  this  was  particu- 
larly true  of  the  more  violent  Gallicans,  whose 
hierarchical  views  were  so  akin  to  those  of  the 
Jansenists.  The  sympathy,  too,  which  the  infidel 
party  of  the  last  century,  as  well  as  of  the  present, 
has  ever  evinced  for  the  too   famous  maxims  of 


xii  In  trodiiction . 

1682,  is  a  circumstance  calculated  to  make  the 
deepest  impression  on  the  mind  of  a  reflecting 
Catholic. 

When  the  Revolution  of  1789  broke  out,  the 
Jansenists,  who  had  so  long  hampered  and  dis- 
tracted the  Catholic  clergy  in  their  conflict  with 
unbelief,  and  thus  had  helped  to  prepare  the  way 
for  that  catastrophe,  became  the  authors  of  that 
schismatical  Constitution,  called  "■  The  Civil  Con- 
stitution of  the  Clergy."  And  this  schismatical 
Constitution  they  attempted  to  uphold  by  an 
appeal  to  the  Four  Articles.  In  that  destructive 
Assembly,  mis-named  the  Constituent,  which 
was  consigning  to  the  tomb  all  ecclesiastical 
liberty,  as  well  as  all  civil  order,  freedom,  and 
prosperity,  those  words,  ''  liberties  of  the  Gallican 
Church"  echoed  from  the  Jansenist  benches, 
must  have  sounded  like  bitter  irony. 

But  the  dreadful  conflagration  which  now 
ensued,  opened  the  eyes  of  many  a  sleeper.  By 
its  lurid  light  many  truths  were  discerned,  which 
had  hitherto  escaped  observation,  or  had  been 
but  dimly  perceived.  In  the  awful  persecution 
which  nov/  desolated  the  Church  of  France  from 
1791  to  1800,  the  bishops,  the  priests,  the  religious 
orders  of  both  sexes,  and  the  devout  laity,  dis- 
played a  patience,  resignation,  zeal,  and  courage, 
worthy  of  the  first  ages  of  Christianity.  Spolia- 
tion, poverty,  imprisonment,  exile,  and  death 
were  the  portion  of  the  faithful  children  of  the 
Church,  as  well  as  of  the  devoted  adherents  of 
their  king  and  country.  Since  the  days  of  the 
Emperor  Diocletian,  a  more  fearful  persecution 
had  never  visited  the  Church.  A  thing  unique 
in  the  history  of  the  world  !  For  ten  years  all 
exercise  of  religion  of  whatever  kind  was  pro- 
scribed.    Blood  flowed  in  torrents,  in  all  the  cities 


In  trodiiction .  x  1 1  i 

of  France  ;  but  as  of  old,  the  blood  of  martyrs 
became  again  the  seed  of  Christians.  Multitudes 
of  each  sex,  and  of  every  age,  rank,  and 
calling,  flocked  to  the  newly-opened  churches ; 
and  faith  revived  in  many  a  heart,  where  it  had 
been  long  a  stranger. 

I'o  repair  the  ruins  of  the  Sanctuary,  the 
newly-elected  Pontiff,  Pius  VII.,  in  the  year  1800, 
entered  into  a  Concordat  with  the  First  Consul  of 
the  French  Republic,  Napoleon  Buonaparte.  For 
the  organization  of  the  Church  of  France,  a  new 
circumscription  of  dioceses  was  under  the  circum- 
stances needed.  The  sovereign  Pontiff  solicited 
the  French  bishops,  most  of  whom  were  living  in 
exile,  to  tender  the  resignation  of  their  sees,  giving 
them  withal  to  understand,  that  that  resigna- 
tion was  a  matter  of  absolute  necessity.  The 
greater  part  of  the  French  prelates  immediately 
complied  with  the  Papal  demands  ;  while  a 
minority  presented  a  respectful  remonstrance 
against  the  very  comprehensive  measure  proposed. 
On  the  Pope's  reiterating  his  demand,  and  point- 
ing out  its  necessity,  that  minority,  with  one  or  two 
exceptions,  ultimately  withdrew  their  remonstrance. 
These  one  or  two  prelates,  followed  by  a  certain 
number  of  ecclesiastics,  founded  the  schism  of 
the  Petite  Eglise,  or  the  schism  of  the  Blanchard- 
ists,  so  called  from  an  Abbe  Blanchard,  who  was 
its  most  prominent  member.*  This  schism  was 
the  direct  fruit  of  the  Four  Gallican  Articles. 
For  by  the  Third  Article,  as  its  partisans  alleged, 
the  Pope  could  never  rise  above  the  canons  of 
the  Church  ;  whereas  in  the  Concordat  just  con- 
cluded with  the  First  Consul,  the  Pontiff,  they 
said,  had  trampled  these  canons  underfoot.  It 
was  in  vain  Catholic  writers,  and  among  others  Mr 
*  See  Note  B. 


xiv  Introduction. 

Charles  Butler,  pointed  out  how  Bossuet  in  his 
"  Defensio  Declarationis  Cleri  Gallicani,"  had  as- 
serted that  the  Pope  possessed  a  dominium  altum, 
or  extraordinary  power,  whereby  in  extreme  cases 
of  emergency,  he  could  set  the  canons  aside.  The 
Blanchardists  replied,  that  they  cared  not  for 
the  interpretations  of  Bossuet,  but  looked  only  to 
the  plain  letter  of  the  Declaration  of  1682.  So 
if  in  1 79 1,  that  Declaration  indirectly  gave  force 
to  the  schism  called  Constitutional,*  it  was  the 
immediate  and  direct  source  of  the  schism  of  the 
Petite  Eglise.  That  schism  endures  to  the  present 
day ;  but  long  ago  abandoned  by  the  bishops  and 
by  many  ecclesiastics,  its  adherents  have  now 
dwindled  down  to  an  insignificant  number.  Let 
us  hope  and  pray  that  in  these  auspicious  days 
of  mercy,  these  schismatics  may  be  reconciled  to 
the  Church  ! 

Scarcely  had  the  First  Consul  signed  the  Con- 
cordat with  the  Pope,  when  he  sought  to  elude 
some  of  its  most  important  provisions.  The  ''  Or- 
ganic Articles,"  which  were  now  published,  excited 
the  surprise  and  the  indignation  of  the  Pontiff  and 
his  Cardinals.  The  "  Organic  Articles,"  said  the 
late  venerable  Archbishop  of  Lyons,  Cardinal  de 
Bonald,  "  are  nought  else  but  an  abridgment  of  the 
*  Civil  Constitution  of  the  clergy,'  with  its  schisma- 
tical  spirit  and  its  errors/' "f 

The  twenty-fourth  of  these  Articles  prescribed 
the  teaching  of  the  Declaration  of  1682  in  all  the 
clerical  seminaries.  The  Placitum  Regium,  which 
was  first  introduced  after  the  Pragmatic  Sanction 
of  the  15th  century,  and  became  more  general  in 
France  from  the  time  of  Louis  XIV.,  was  revived 

*  See  Note  C. 

+  Mandement  de   1844,  apud  Gerin.      Recherclies  Historiques 
sur  I'Assemblee  de  1682,  p.  v.,  Paris,  1869. 


Ifitrodnctiojt.  xv 

by  the  "  Organic  Articles,"  in  respect  to  all  disci- 
plinary, and  (what  was  before  unknown)  in  respect 
to  all  dogmatic,  bulls  of  the  sovereign  Pontiff. 
Again,  processions  and  other  mere  external  func- 
tions of  the  Church  were  by  these  laws  subjected 
to  the  arbitrary  control  of  the  French  police.  These 
"Organic  Articles"  were  immediately  condemned 
by  the  Holy  See  ;  and  from  that  time  to  the  pre- 
sent day,  the  bishops  of  France,  even  those  who 
were  partizans  of  the  Galilean  Declaration,  have 
ever  protested  against  them. 

The  First  Napoleon,  it  cannot  be  denied,  ren- 
dered the  greatest  services  to  religion  and  to  civil 
society.  He  re-opened,  as  we  have  seen,  the  long- 
closed  churches,  replaced  the  desecrated  altars,  and 
called  back  to  the  sanctuary  the  ministers  of  re- 
ligion who  had  so  long  languished  in  exile  and  in 
penury.  He,  at  the  same  time,  with  a  strong  hand, 
curbed  impious  and  anarchic  factions,  re-established 
order,  re-organized  the  administration,  compiled,  out 
of  the  old  legislation  of  France,  with  modifications 
and  supplements,  a  new  code  of  laws,  and  threw 
open  to  the  long-suffering  adherents  of  the  throne 
the  portals  of  their  country.  This  work  of  religious 
and  social  reconstruction  was  doubtless  very  im- 
perfect, was  marred  by  many  glaring  defects,  yet, 
under  the  awful  circumstances  of  the  times,  it  was 
a  most  meritorious  undertaking. 

Both  during  the  consulate  and  the  empire, 
Napoleon  issued  many  edicts  most  favourable  to 
religion.  He  permitted  the  re-establishment  of 
many  female  communities  devoted  to  education 
and  to  various  works  of  mercy,  spiritual  and  cor- 
poral, and  sanctioned  the  order  of  the  brothers  of 
the  Christian  schools,  the  restoration  of  the  Lazar- 
ists,  the  Saint-Sulpicians,  the  priests  of  the  Holy 
Spirit,  the  house  for  foreign  missions,  and  allotted 


xvi  Introduction. 

funds  for  the  support  of  many  clerical  seminaries. 
Some  of  these  excellent  edicts  were  passed  just  as 
he  was  on  the  point  of  comIn<^  to  a  rupture  with 
the  sovereign  Pontiff,  Pius  VII.,  to  whom  he  was 
under  so  many  obligations.  Throughout  his  reign, 
he  played  fast  and  loose  with  the  most  sacred 
principles,  at  one  time  favouring  Catholics,  at 
another  infidels  and  Jacobins.  Hence,  it  is  difficult 
to  believe  that  this  remarkable  man,  though  never 
totally  devoid  of  faith,  was  yet  animated  by  other 
than  mere  political  motives  in  the  measures  he 
adopted  for  the  restoration  of  religion. 

His  ascent  to  the  imperial  throne,  Napoleon 
had  stained  with  the  innocent  blood  of  a  young  and 
illustrious  prince,  shed  without  any  provocation. 
Soon,  in  his  career  of  rapid  conquest,  he  grasps 
one  kingdom  after  another.  The  Papal  principa- 
lities of  Beneventum  and  Ponte  Corvo  he  annexes 
to  his  Italian  kingdom,  and  likewise  Venice  and 
the  adjacent  countries,  by  a  special  treaty  with 
Austria.  The  King  of  Naples,  for  having  received 
an  English  squadron  into  his  ports,  falls  under  the 
ban  of  the  Corsican  despot;  and  his  throne  is  given 
away  to  Prince  Joseph  Buonaparte.  The  Republic 
of  Holland  is  erected  into  a  kingdom,  and  another 
prince  of  the  new  imperial  line  set  over  it.  The 
Germanic  empire  is  dissolved ;  and  many  of  its 
former  provinces,  under  the  name  of  the  Confedera- 
tion of  the  Rhine,  are  put  under  the  protection,  or, 
more  properly  speaking,  the  absolute  control  of 
the  Emperor  Napoleon.  The  insatiable  ambition 
of  this  conqueror  knows  no  bounds.  He  seeks  to 
bring  the  Church  under  the  same  yoke,  which  he 
has  fixed  on  the  necks  of  temporal  potentates. 
On  the  refusal  of  Pope  Pius  VII.  to  adhere  to  the 
system  of  the  Continental  blockade,  and  to  shut 
out  English  vessels   from  his   ports,   the    French 


Introduction.  xvii 

troops  in  1809  invade  the  Ecclesiastical  States, 
overthrow  the  temporal  sovereignty  of  the  Pontiff, 
and  virtually  make  him  a  prisoner  in  his  palace. 
The  sacred  college  is  dispersed  :  many  of  its  most 
zealous  members  are  sent  into  exile  or  imprison- 
ment ;  the  most  trusted  counsellors  of  the  Pontiff 
are  removed ;  and  himself  and  his  faithful  minister, 
Cardinal  Pacca,  dragged  into  captivity. 

In  the  treatment  of  the  Holy  Pontiff,  the  Impe- 
rial Government  seemed  bent  on  imitating  the 
barbarous  conduct  of  the  Jacobin  Republic  of  1797 
towards  Pope  Pius  VI.  While  the  able  and  faithful 
counsellor  of  Pius  VII.  was  confined  at  Fenestrelle, 
in  Piedmont,  his  venerable  master  was  for  a  long 
time  detained  at  Savona,  in  the  same  state,  and 
thence  afterwards  transferred  to  Fontainebleau.  To 
the  unjust  political  demands  already  mentioned, 
Napoleon  added  others  of  an  ecclesiastical  kind,  and 
far  more  repugnant  to  the  conscience  of  the  head 
of  the  Church.  He  required  the  Pontiff  to  permit 
the  establishment  of  a  patriarchate  in  the  Church 
of  France,  and  to  allow  the  institution  of  bishops, 
as  proclaimed  by  the  Constituent  Assembly  in  the 
**  Civil  Constitution  of  the  Clergy,"  to  be  transferred 
from  the  Holy  See  to  the  metropolitans,  and,  in 
the  case  of  the  nomination  of  the  latter,  to  the 
bishops  of  the  province.  These  imperial  demands 
were  energetically  resisted  by  the  courageous 
Pontiff.  But  the  emperor  now  absolutely  needed 
the  co-operation  of  the  Pope.  Numerous  sees  in 
the  vast  French  empire  had  become  vacant ;  and 
as  long  as  Pius  VII.  was  detained  a  captive,  he 
refused,  and  justly,  institution  to  these  episcopal 
sees.  Under  these  circumstances,  the  emperor's 
uncle.  Cardinal  Fesch,  archbishop  of  Lyons,  and 
Cardinal  Maury,  who,  though  in  the  Constituent 
Assembly  so  eloquent  a  defender  of  the  Church 

b 


xviii  Introduction. 

and  of  the  monarchy,  now  tarnished  his  fair  repu- 
tation by  a  shameful  serviHty, — these  two  cardinals 
advised  Napoleon  to  convoke  a  National  Council. 
In  the  year  i8i  i,  this  ecclesiastical  Assembly,  com- 
posed  of   French,   Italian,    Belgian,  and,  in   part, 
German  bishops,    met    at    Paris.      But    from    the 
arbitrary  selection  of  its  members,  and  the  sort  of 
intimidation  exercised  over  it  by  the  emperor,  this 
Assembly  had   no  title  to  the  name  of  Council. 
The  main  subject  submitted  to  its  deliberations 
was,  whether,  from  the  refusal  of  the  Pope  to  give 
canonical  institution  to  the  priests  nominated  to 
the  vacant  sees,  that  institution  could  be  conferred 
by  the  metropolitans.     This  proposition  was  indig- 
nantly rejected  by  the  majority  of  the  Council.     In 
that  majority,  the  eloquent  Monseigneur  Boulogne, 
bishop   of  Troyes,  the  bishops  of  Ghent  and   of 
Tournai,  the  bishop  of  Chambery,  and  a  German 
prelate,  afterwards  so  great  a  confessor,  Monseig- 
neur Droste-Vischering,  put   forth  energetic  pro- 
tests against  the  monstrous  claims  of  the  French 
Government.     The  Council  was  dissolved  by  the 
emperor;  and  three  of  the  prelates  just  named — 
the  bishops  of  Troyes,  Ghent,  and  Tournai — were 
committed  to  prison. 

Napoleon  gave  orders  to  his  ministers  of  worship 
in  France  and  Italy  to  practise  on  the  fears  and 
hopes  of  each  bishop  in  private,  and  to  use,  in  turn, 
the  language  of  intimidation  and  of  seduction. 
Assured  of  the  sentiments  of  the  majority,  he 
hastened  to  convoke  the  Council  anew.  That 
majority  passed  a  decree  whereby  it  was  declared 
that  the  emperor,  by  the  Concordat,  possessed  the 
right  of  nominating  to  vacant  bishoprics  ;  and  that 
in  case  the  Pope  suffered  six  months  to  elapse 
without  giving  institution  to  the  party  so  nomi- 
nated, the  right  of  institution  would  then  devolve 


Introduction,  xix 

on  the  metropolitan,  or  in  the  case  of  the  nomina- 
tion to  an  archbishopric,  on  the  senior  bishop  of 
the  province.  This  decree  was  presented  for  ratifi- 
cation to  the  Pope  by  five  cardinals  and  nine 
bishops,  deputed  to  the  illustrious  captive  at 
Savona. 

The  venerable  Pontiff,  advanced  in  years,  en- 
feebled by  sickness,  and,  in  his  long  captivity, 
bereft  of  all  his  faithful  advisers,  utterly  isolated, 
deprived  sometimes  of  the  very  instruments  of 
writing,  grieving,  too,  over  the  widowhood  of  so 
many  suffering  churches, — the  venerable  Pontiff,  I 
say,  yielded  at  last  to  the  urgent  entreaties  and 
remonstrances  of  the  courtly  prelates,  who  had  been 
deputed  to  him.  He  consented  to  the  despatch  of 
bulls  to  the  bishops  nominated  by  Napoleon,  and, 
by  a  brief,  approved  and  confirmed  the  decree  of 
the  Council  of  Paris. 

The  Pope  was  in  the  course  of  the  year  1812 
transferred  from  Savona  to  Fontainebleau  ;  and 
now,  on  the  25th  January  181 3,  Napoleon  laid 
before  his  Holiness  a  new  Concordat,  which  he  said 
was  calculated  to  bring  about  a  general  pacification, 
and  whereby  the  Pope  was  called  on  to  renew  the 
previous  concession  relative  to  the  institution  of 
bishops  nominated  by  the  emperor,  as  well  as  to 
renounce  the  temporal  sovereignty  of  Rome.  The 
Pope,  in  that  state  of  utter  isolation  and  dejection 
I  have  described,  appends  his  signature  to  the 
document  presented  to  him.  The  cardinals  are 
then  released  from  captivity,  and  allowed  to  visit 
his  Holiness. 

Ever  since  the  Pontiff  had  made  to  Napoleon  the 
imprudent  concessions  that  have  been  mentioned, 
he  was  distracted  by  anxiety  and  grief.  When  he 
once  more  saw^,  after  a  long  separation,  his  faithful 
counsellor,  Cardinal  Pacca,  he  unbosomed  to  him 


XX  Introdtiction. 

his  deep  perplexities  and  sorrows.  The  cardinal 
soothed  the  aching  heart  of  his  master,  and  gave 
him  the  best  advice.  On  the  24th  March  18 13,  the 
Pontiff  addressed  to  Napoleon  an  autograph  letter, 
in  which  he  described  the  bitter  anguish  of  his 
own  conscience,  and  the  utter  impossibility  he  was 
in  of  executing  the  Convention,  that  had  been  so 
reluctantly  extorted  from  him.  The  emperor  then 
burst  forth  into  idle  menaces  against  the  cardinals 
true  to  his  Holiness;  but  the  hand  of  God  was 
already  laid  on  the  oppressor  of  Europe,  and  the 
persecutor  of  His  Church. 

In  the  violent  contest  which  he  had  for  five  years 
carried  on  with  the  sovereign  Pontiff,  Buonaparte 
had,  either  by  himself  or  by  his  creatures,  ever 
insisted  on  the  maintenance  of  the  four  Gallican 
propositions,  as  the  basis  of  his  ecclesiastical  legis- 
lation. These,  as  we  have  seen,  formed  part  of  the 
''Organic  Articles"  of  1802.  ''With  the  four 
Articles  of  1682,"  Napoleon  once  said,  "  I  am 
master  of  the  Church  of  France  : " — "  Avec  les 
quatre  Articles,  je  suis  a  cheval."  "  With  the 
second  of  these  Articles,"  he  used  again  to  say,  "  I 
can  do  without  the  Pope  :  " — "  Je  peux  me  passer 
du  Pape."*  "  Imbeciles  that  ye  are,"  he  said,  on 
the  6th  March  18 10,  to  the  Belgian  bishops,  "  if  I 
had  not  found,  in  the  doctrine  of  Bossuet,  and  in 
the  maxims  of  the  Gallican  Church,  principles 
analogous  to  my  own,  I  should  have  become  a 
Protestant."  t  Again,  the  Senatus  Consultum  of 
February  1810,  which  despoiled  Pope  Pius  VII.  of 
his  states,  ordained  that  his  successor  should  take 
an  oath  to  do  nothing  contrary  to  the  four  Proposi- 
tions of  1682;  and  a  decree  of  the  same  month 
declared  them  a  law  of  the  French  empire. 

*  J.  de  Maislre,  De  I'Eglise  Gallicane,  liv.  ii.,  c.  9. 

t  D'Haussonville,  I'Eglise  et  le  premier  Empire,  t,  iii.,  p.  362. 


Introduction.  xxi 

But  "  the  mighty  hunter  before  the  Lord,"  as 
the  illustrious  Gorrcs  once  called  the  First  Na- 
poleon, was  now  near  the  close  of  his  career.  The 
wail  of  the  outraged  Church,  and  the  cries  of 
trampled  nations,  had  risen  up  to  Heaven.  The 
appalling  disasters  of  the  retreat  from  Moscow, 
almost  unexampled  in  history — the  uprising  of 
the  German  races,  and  the  battle  of  nations  at 
Leipsic  —  the  glorious  victories  of  the  British 
troops  in  Spain,  seconded  by  the  heroic  efforts  of 
her  people,  fearfully  avenged  the  cause  of  God  and 
of  humanity.  The  venerable  Pontiff,  Pius  VII., 
was,  after  his  long  captivity,  reinstated  in  his 
dominions  ;  and  his  freedom  secured  the  liberty  of 
the  Church. 

But  now,  before  we  proceed  further,  let  us  turn 
to  examine  for  a  moment  the  heretical  offshoots 
of  Gallicanism. 

Van  Espen,  a  learned  canonist  of  the  University 
of  Louvain,byhis  ultra-Gallican  principles,  prepared 
the  way  for  the  system  of  his  disciple  Hontheim, 
suffragan  to  the  Archbishop  of  Treves,  and  who, 
under  the  name  of  Justinus  Febronius,  renewed 
many  of  the  errors  of  Richer  respecting  the 
hierarchy.  Republished  in  1763a  book  entitled 
*' De  Statu  Ecclesiae;"  and  the  following  summary  of 
its  contents  has  been  given  by  the  great  German 
canonist,  Dr  Phillips: — "Our  Lord  Jesus  Christ, 
according  to  Febronius,  has  conferred  on  the 
whole  body  of  the  faithful  the  power  of  the  keys. 
This  power,  to  use  the  language  of  the  author,  the 
community  of  the  faithful  possesses  radicaliter  et 
principaliteVy  and  the  bishop  imialitcr  ct  nsufrnc- 
tiialiter.  Having  laid  down  this  principle,  he 
affirms  that  each  bishop  holds  his  authority 
immediately  of  God,  and  has  received,  as  successor 
of  the  apostles,  the  unlimited  right  of  dispensation. 


xxii  Introduction. 

of  judgment  in  matters  of  heresy,  and  of  episcopal 
consecration.  He  admits,  indeed,  that  Peter  was 
distinguished  by  Jesus  Christ  from  among  the 
other  apostles,  and  that  he  received  a  primacy  oyer 
them  ;  but  that  primacy,  according  to  him,  consists 
in  a  mere  pre-eminence,  like  to  that  of  the  metro- 
politan over  his  suffragans.  The  Pope  has, 
doubtless,  the  spiritual  charge  over  all  the  churches; 
he  exercises  over  them  a  right  of  inspection  and  of 
direction  ;  but  he  cannot  claim  any  jurisdiction. 
As  head  of  Christendom,  he  is  superior  to  each 
bishop  in  particular ;  he  has  over  him  the  majoritas, 
but  not  over  the  whole  episcopal  body,  which  is  the 
sole  true  sovereign  of  the  Church.  .  .  .  The  Pope 
has  no  power  over  the  canons,  but  is  only  charged 
with  their  execution.  It  is,  therefore,  always 
allowable  to  appeal  from  the  Pope  to  the  Council ; 
as  the  Sovereign  Pontiff  is  not  the  judge  in  the 
ultimate  instance,  nor  an  absolute  monarch,  nor  an 
infallible  teacher."  * 

Such  was  the  teaching  of  Febronius.  By  dis- 
turbing and  displacing  the  centre  of  CathoHc 
unity,  he  naturally  forced  the  Episcopate  to  seek 
a  support  and  refuge  in  the  secular  power.  And 
this  pretended  advocate  of  the  rights  of  bishops 
called  upon  civil  governments  frequently  to  convoke 
General  Councils,  to  have  recourse  to  the  Placet,  to 
the  appeal  as  from  abuse,  and  lastly,  to  the  renunci- 
ation of  ecclesiastical  obedience.  The  errors  of  this 
disastrous  system  are  fully  exposed  in  the  following 
work  ;  for  the  principles  of  Janus  are  but  a  further 
development  of  those  of  Febronius. 

The  production  of  the  latter  was  severely  con- 
demned by  the  Holy  See,  and  refuted  by  many 

*  Not  having  the  Geniian  orighial  of  Dr  Philips's  work  at 
hand,  I  have  quoted  from  the  French  translation  : — Traite  du  droit 
ecclesiastique,  par  Dr.  G.  Philips,  t.  iii.,  p.  211,  12. 


Introdtution,  xxili 


able  and  learned  theologians  of  Germany  and 
Italy,  among  whom  Zaccaria,  the  Ballerini,  and  Car- 
dinal Gerdil,  were  the  most  distinguished.  Later, 
the  author  himself  recanted  his  opinions,  and  su 
mitted  to  the  decision  of  the  Holy  See.  But  h 
fatal  doctrines  struck  deep  root  in  Germany,  and 
especially  in  Austria. 

In  the  year  1780,  an  active  and  talented  prince 
ascended  the  Imperial  throne  of  Germany. 
Deeply  imbued  with  the  principles  of  Jansenism, 
the  Emperor  Joseph  II.  had  been  fascinated  with 
the  ecclesiastical  system  of  Febronius,  and  strove, 
by  craft  and  violence,  to  enforce  its  application 
throughout  his  dominions.  He  introduced  the 
Placitum  Regium  for  all  Papal  bulls  and  briefs,  as 
well  as  for  episcopal  pastorals;  suppressed  diocesan 
seminaries,  instituting  for  each  ecclesiastical  pro- 
vince a  general  seminary,  to  which  he  was  to 
appoint  the  professors  ;  interdicted  the  provincials 
of  religious  orders  from  corresponding  with  their 
superiors  at  Rome  ;  forbade  all  parties  whatsoever 
to  recur  to  the  Holy  See  for  dispensations  or  for 
any  kind  of  favour  ;  abolished  all  the  contemplative 
orders,  and  the  greater  part  of  the  active  ones ; 
suppressed  all  confraternities  ;  prohibited  religious 
processions  ;  regulated,  with  a  minuteness  as  puerile 
as  it  was  arrogant,  the  celebration  of  the  divine 
offices  ;  invaded  the  property  and  political  rights 
of  the  clergy  ;  everywhere  encouraged  and  pro- 
moted Jansenistical  writings  and  teachers,  and  per- 
mitted the  freest  circulation  to  irreligious  works. 

At  the  instigation  of  this  emperor,  the  Arch- 
bishops of  Mayence,  Treves,  Cologne,  and  Salzburg 
held,  in  1786,  a  congress  at  Ems,  and  there  drew  up 
a  declaration  consisting  of  twenty-six  articles.  This 
was  a  manifesto,  conceived  quite  in  the  spirit  of 
Joseph    II.,  against    the   appointment    of  Papal 


ir- 
er,    V 

lis  y 


xxiv  Introduction. 

nuncios  in  Germany,  and  against  the  pretended 
encroachments  of  the  Holy  See  on  episcopal 
rights.  This  Declaration,  called  the  Points  of  Ems, 
was  energetically  resisted  by  the  other  German 
prelates,  as  well  as  by  the  Elector  of  Bavaria,  and 
drew  down  a  vigorous  apostolic  epistle  from  His 
Holiness,  Pope  Pius  VI.  The  Archbishop  of 
Mayence  withdrew  his  adhesion  to  this  Febronian 
document.  But  how  severely  were  all  those  un- 
faithful prelates  chastised  by  Divine  Providence, 
when,  eighteen  years  afterwards,  theirtemporal  prin- 
cipalities were  torn  from  them,  and  that  old  German 
empire,  which  had  lasted  for  well-nigh  a  thousand 
years,  and  wherein  they  had  held  so  brilliant  a 
position,  was  levelled  with  the  earth  ! 

Pope  Pius  VI.  undertook  a  journey  to  Vienna,  to 
point  out  to  the  infatuated  emperor  the  abyss  that 
was  yawning  at  his  feet ;  to  draw  him  back  from 
a  course  of  policy,  that  was  as  opposed  to  the 
stability  of  his  throne,  and  to  the  temporal  welfare 
of  his  people,  as  it  was  to  the  interests  of  the 
Church  herself.  But  all  the  remonstrances  and  ex- 
hortations of  the  Holy  Pontiff  are  fruitless  *  The 
emperor  persists  in  his  schismatical  course ;  alienates 
the  affections  of  his  Austrian  and  Hungarian  sub- 
jects ;  drives  those  of  Brabant  and  Flanders  into 
open  revolt ;  and  witnessing  the  miscarriage  of  all 
his  chimerical  plans,  dies  of  a  broken  heart. 


*  During  the  abode  of  Pins  VI.  at  Vienna,  Dr.  Eybel,  a  Feb- 
ronian canonist,  and  a  worthy  precursor  of  Janus,  published  a 
pamphlet  entitled  "  Quis  est  Papa" — "  Who  is  the  Pope  ?"  To  this 
a  very  learned  reply  was  written,  under  the  title  "  Quis  est  Petrus  ?" 
But  the  defence  of  the  Papacy  came  also  from  another  and  an  unsus- 
pected hand.  The  illustrious  Protestant  historian,  John  von  Midler, 
then  a  young  man,  published  at  the  same  time  a  very  interesting 
work,  entitled  "Journeys  of  the  Popes" — "Reisen  der  Päpste," 
where  occurs  that  very  remarkable  passage  which  the  reader  will 
find  translated  in  the  Appendix. 


Introduction.  xxv 

Politics  enter  not  into  the  scope  of  this  essay ; 
but  it  may  not  be  uninteresting  to  observe,  that 
this  emperor's  poHtical  views  were  strictly  analo- 
gous to  his  ecclesiastical.  In  the  same  way  as  he 
attacked  the  rights  of  the  Papacy,  and  of  the 
Episcopate,  religious  orders,  and  observances  of 
discipline ;  so  he  failed  not  to  show  his  enmity  to 
aristocracy,  to  local  legislatures,  to  municipal  cor- 
porations, and  to  provincial  usages  and  institutions. 

But  in  his  war  against  the  Church,  Joseph  II. 
found  a  worthy  ally  in  his  brother,  Leopold,  Grand - 
Duke  of  Tuscany.  In  his  pretended  attempt  to 
reform  the  Tuscan  Church,  the  Grand-Duke  re- 
ceived the  co-operation  of  Scipio  Ricci,  the  Bishop 
of  Pistoia  and  Prato.  The  latter  was  a  great 
admirer  of  the  French  Jansenistic  Appellants,  and 
especially  of  Quesnel,  whose  works  he  got  translated 
into  Italian.  He  convoked  in  1786  a  synod  of  his 
clergy  at  Pistoia,  excluding  from  it,  however,  such 
ecclesiastics  as  vi^ere  strongly  opposed  to  his 
Jansenistic  views,  and,  on  the  other  hand,  inviting 
from  other  parts  of  Italy  strangers  in  whom  he 
could  confide.  Though,  as  we  have  seen,  the 
Assembly  was  a  packed  one,  Ricci  encountered 
much  opposition  to  his  projects  from  some  of  its 
members  ;  for  thirteen  ecclesiastics  refused  to  sub- 
scribe its  decrees.  All  the  articles  on  Grace  and 
Free-will,  on  the  Constitution  of  the  Church,  on 
the  Sacraments,  on  the  Liturgy,  and  on  Discipline, 
were  conceived  in  the  spirit  of  the  Jansenists  and 
the  Febronians.  The  more  important  decrees 
shall  be  noticed,  when  I  speak  of  the  great  Papal 
Bull,  Aiictorcm  fidei,  which  condemned  them. 

The  Grand-Duke  Leopold  summoned  to  Florence 
in  the  year  1787  an  Assembly  of  all  the  Tuscan 
bishops,  preparatory  to  the  convocation  of  a 
national  council.     This  Assembly  he  hoped  might 


xxvi  Introduction, 

be  induced  to  support  the  religious  innovations  of 
his  episcopal  protege,  Scipio  Ricci.  But  in  that 
Assembly  of  seventeen  prelates,  four  only  shared, 
to  any  extent,  the  opinions  of  the  bishop  of  Pistoia. 
Most  of  the  propositions  brought  forward  by  the 
latter  were  rejected  ;  and  the  Jansenistic  writings, 
that  had  been  circulated  by  him  in  his  diocese,  as 
well  as  a  Pastoral  Instruction  conceived  in  the 
same  spirit  by  the  Bishop  of  Chiusi,  were  condemned 
as  replete  with  grave  errors.  The  episcopal 
Assembly  was  dissolved  by  the  Grand-Duke 
Leopold  ;  for  its  decrees  had  disappointed  him,  as 
well  as  mortified  his  favourite.  The  religious  in- 
novations of  Ricci  had,  in  the  highest  degree, 
excited  the  indignation  of  the  faithful  of  his  diocese. 
Twice  the  people  burst  into  his  palace  at  Prato, 
and  carried  off  his  heretical  books  and  papers. 
They  ultimately  triumphed  ;  and  in  despite  of  their 
bishop,  retained  their  confraternities  for  works  of 
piety  and  charity,  their  processions,  relics,  images, 
and  indulgenced  altars.  The  prelate  who  had 
caused  so  much  trouble  and  scandal,  was  obliged 
to  resign  his  see  ;  and  his  patron,  the  Grand-Duke, 
on  ascending,  at  the  close  of  1789,  the  Imperial 
throne  of  Germany,  saw  the  error  of  his  course, 
and  retraced  the  insensate  policy  he  had  so  long 
pursued.  Many  years  afterwards,  Scipio  Ricci 
himself  recanted  his  errors,  and  submitted  to  the 
various  decisions  of  the  Holy  See. 

In  1794,  Pope  Pius  VI.  issued  the  famous  Bull, 
Auctorem  fidei,  which,  from  prudential  motives,  he 
had  long  delayed.  Eighty-five  propositions  were 
extracted  from  the  acts  of  the  Synod  of  Pistoia, 
and  condemned,  under  various  qualifications  ;  such 
as  heretical,  schismatical,  tending  to  schism  and 
heresy,  erroneous,  temerarious,  offensive  to  pious 
ears,   and  so  forth.     The   most  important  points 


Iniroduciion,  x  x  v  i  I 

only,  from  want  of  space,  can  here  be  noticed.  The 
proposition  (a  favourite  one  with  the  Jansenists, 
and  which  has  been  revived  by  Janus),  that,  in  the 
latter  times,  a  certain  obscuration  of  important 
truths  has  prevailed  in  the  Church,  is  condemned  as 
heretical.  The  second,  third,  and  fourth  proposi- 
tions, purporting  that  the  ecclesiastical  authority 
exercised  by  pastors  has  emanated  from  the  com- 
munity of  the  faithful ;  that  the  Pope  has  derived 
his  powers,  not  from  Jesus  Christ,  but  from  the 
Church  ;  and  that  in  regulating  external  discipline, 
the  Church  abused  her  power  ; — these  propositions 
are  all  respectively  condemned  as  heretical.  Other 
doctrines  already  stigmatised  in  the  writings  of 
Wyckhffe,  Luther,  Baius,  Jansenius,  and  Quesnel, 
incur  grave  censure  also.  And,  lastly,  to  bring 
forward  a  point  which  more  directly  bears  on  the 
subject  of  this  essay,  the  Sovereign  Pontiff,  in  this 
bull,  points  out  the  extreme  temerity  of  the  Pistoian 
Synod,  not  only  in  giving  its  adhesion  to  the 
Declaration  of  1682,  so  often  reproved  by  the  Holy 
See,  but  in  proclaiming  it  as  binding  on  the  con- 
science of  all  Catholics. 

Not  in  Tuscany  only,  but  in  other  states  of 
Italy  also — in  Venice,  Parma,  and  Naples — we 
witness  the  same  sort  of  co-operation  between 
Jansenism  on  the  one  hand,  and  unbelief  on  the 
other.  Spain  and  Portugal  presented  the  same 
spectacle.  In  all  those  countries,  as  well  as  in 
France  and  Germany,  ultra-Gallicanism,  Jansen- 
ism, and  Febronianism  combined  with  irreligion, 
immorality,  and  civil  despotism  in  fettering  the 
spiritual  action  of  the  Church,  assailing  her  politi- 
cal and  proprietary  rights,  encroaching  on  Papal 
and  episcopal  jurisdiction,  suppressing  the  most 
energetic  religious  orders,  and  thus  preparing  the 
way  for  that  great  catastrophe,  which  has   been 


xxviii  Introduction. 

already  briefly  described.  While  the  anti-Chris- 
tian foe  was  thundering  at  the  gates  of  the  fortress, 
disloyal  and  treacherous  factions  within  sought  to 
cripple  the  power,  and  insult  the  majesty  of  the 
chief;  and  no  weapon  did  they  find  more  effectual 
for  their  purpose  than  the  propositions  of  1682. 

II.  I  have  now  brought  down  from  the  reign  of 
Louis  XIV.  to  the  Restoration  of  18 14,  the  history 
of  Gallicanism,  and  of  its  various  offshoots. 

Gallicanism,  which  sprang  up  in  the  fifteenth 
century,  and  had  its  rise,  partly  in  the  very  untoward 
circumstances  of  that  age,  partly  in  the  erroneous 
writings  of  Pierre  D'Ailly,  Gerson,  Almain,  and 
other  French  divines  of  that  time,  touching  the 
hierarchy,  was,  as  we  have  seen,  revived  by 
Louis  XIV.  The  immediate  occasion  of  that 
revival  was  the  desire  of  that  monarch  to  extend 
to  dioceses,  that  had  hitherto  enjoyed  the  right  of 
exemption,  the  regalian  rights  of  the  crown  to 
the  enjoyment  of  the  episcopal  revenues,  as  well 
as  to  the  nomination  to  benefices  during  the 
vacancy  of  a  see.*  This  pretension  was  resisted 
by  only  two  French  prelates,  who  in  their  opposi- 
tion were  supported  by  Pope  Innocent  XI.  This 
conduct  of  the  Pontiff  led  to  the  convocation  of 
the  Assembly  of  1682,  and  was  the  occasion  of  the 

*  "  On  appelait  ainsi,"  says  M.  Gerin,  *'Ie  droit  que  s'attribuait  le 
roi  de  France  de  jouir  des  revenus  d'un  certain  nombre  d'eveches, 
et  de  nommer  aux  benefices,  qui  en  dependoient  pendant  la 
vacance  des  sieges,  jusqu'a  ce  que  les  nouveaux  titulaires  eussent 
prete  serment  de  fidelite,  et  fait  enregistrer  leur  serment  ä  la 
chambre  des  comptes,  ce  qui  s'appeloit  clorre  la  regale.  C'etait 
done  une  exception  au  droit  commun  et  une  charge  pour  I'Eglise, 
qui  s'expliquoit  d'ailleurs,  dans  certains  dioceses,  par  le  souvenir 
des  fondations,  que  les  princes  y  avoient  faites.  Le  deuxieme 
concile  general  de  Lyon  (1275)  avoit  autorise  la  Regale  dans  les 
eveches  oil  eile  etoit  etablie  par  titre  de  fondation,  ou  par  une  anci- 
enne  coutume,  et  defendu  expressatient  de  Vintroduire  dans  cciix  on 
eile  n  etoit  pas  encore  rente. '"' — Recherches  Historiques,  c,  i.,  pp.  41, 42. 


Introduction.  xxix 

too  famous  Declaration  put  forth  by  the  prelates 
composing  it.  That  Declaration  formally  con- 
tradicted those  views  respecting  the  spiritual 
prerogatives  of  the  Papacy,  that,  in  despite  of  a 
very  partial  and  occasional  dissent,  had,  as  we 
have  seen,  on  three  occasions,  in  the  course  of  the 
seventeenth  century,  been  solemnly  proclaimed  by 
a  large  portion  of  the  assembled  Episcopate  of 
France. 

It  will  now  be  my  duty  in  this  second  Part, 
briefly  to  describe  the  anti-Gallican  reaction, 
which  began  with  the  Restoration  of  the  Bourbons, 
and  during  which  time,  as  well  as  under  the 
subsequent  governments,  the  French  clergy  gradu- 
ally returned  to  those  principles  that  their  prede- 
cessors had,  till  the  period  of  1682,  almost  uni- 
versally professed. 

*'The  Restoration,"  said  the  Abbe  de  la  Mennais 
in  his  happier  days,  "  was  hailed  by  the  acclama- 
tions of  the  people.  Indeed,  it  might  be  called  the 
festival  of  civilization."*  Its  mission  was  the 
reconstruction  of  the  religious  and  the  social 
edifice.  Religion,  which,  since  the  beginning  of 
the  century,  had  been  making  steady  advances, 
now  moved  with  accelerated  progress.  That  pro- 
gress was  due  to  the  zeal  of  the  clergy,  as  well  as  to 
the  active  co-operation  of  the  devout  laity,  to  the 
domestic  Missions,  that  reconciled  vast  numbers  to 
the  Church,  to  the  increase  of  good  schools  and 
colleges  for  the  higher  and  the  lower  classes,  to 
eminent  preachers,  like  Mgr.  de  Boulogne,  Mgr. 
Frayssinous,  and  others,  who  so  ably  combated 
irreligion,  and  to  great  writers,  that  in  the  same 
cause  nobly  fought  by  their  side.  Of  these,  the 
most  illustrious  were  Chateaubriand,  De  Bonald, 
De  Maistre,  and  the  Abbe  de  la  Mennais  before  his 

*  Le  Drapeau  blanc,  1823. 


XXX  IntrodMctwn. 

fall.  These  were  the  four  Promethean  spirits 
that  to  France,  enveloped  in  the  night  of  irreligion, 
brought  down  fire  from  heaven.  The  first  by  his 
eloquence  kindled  the  fire  of  imagination,  that 
materialism  had  ;  well-nigh  extinguished  in  the 
minds  of  his  countrymen,  and  poured  into  their 
desolate  hearts  the  balm  of  Christian  hope.  The 
second,  bearing  the  torch  of  Revelation,  explored, 
with  wonderful  sagacity  the  depths  of  meta- 
physical and  political  science.  The  third,  from  his 
lofty  eyrie,  cast  an  eagle  glance  into  the  most  hidden 
places  of  philosophy,  politics,  history,  and  theology. 
And  the  fourth,  before  his  sad  aberrations,  by  his 
burning  eloquence  and  iron  grasp  of  reasoning, 
brought  multitudes  over  to  the  Church. 

But  now,  to  confine  myself  to  the  history  of 
Gallicanism,  Chateaubriand,  among  the  writers  I 
have  named,  never  studied  the  question,  and  must 
therefore  be  considered  neutral.  De  Bonald,  more, 
I  believe,  from  a  sagacious  instinct  than  from 
learned  inquiry,  took  the  Roman  view  of  the 
subject ;  whereas  his  two  great  contemporaries, 
De  Maistre  and  the  Abbe  de  la  Mennais,  were  the 
two  prime  movers  in  the  anti-Gallican  reaction. 
But  I  must  not  anticipate. 

At  the  Restoration  a  great  crisis  occurred  in  the 
history  of  the  Gallican  system. 

The  venerable  clergy  of  France  had  come  forth 
from  exile  and  from  imprisonment,  bearing  on 
their  limbs  the  scars  of  confessorship,  and  on  their 
brows  the  aureola  of  martyrdom.  This  clergy 
well  remembered  the  insolent  encroachments  of 
the  ancient  Parliaments  on  ecclesiastical  jurisdic- 
tion, the  odious  machinations  of  the  Jansenists,  the 
violent  persecution  of  the  Constituent  Assembly, 
and  the  more  recent  tyranny  of  the  first  Napoleon 
— all   perpetrated   in    the   name   of  the  Gallican 


Introdtiction, 


XXXI 


Articles.  They  had  witnessed,  also,  the  two 
schisms  which,  directly  or  indirectly,  had  sprung- 
out  of  those  deplorable  opinions.  They  knew, 
too,  the  sympathy  ever  professed  for  them  by 
Protestants  and  infidels.  The  ecclesiastical  Re- 
volution, too,  wrought  by  the  Emperor  Joseph  II., 
and  the  sad  doings  of  the  Congress  of  Ems,  and  of 
the  Pistoian  Synod,  could  not  have  escaped  their 
attention.  Hence  from  this  time  forward  the 
bishops  of  France  strove  to  keep  these  maxims  in 
the  background.*  In  the  letters,  which,  during  the 
first  years  of  the  Restoration,  they  were  wont  to 
address  to  the  venerable  Vicar  Apostolic  of  the 
London  district,  Dr  Poynter,  in  answer  to  his 
complaints  respecting  the  schismatical  Blanchard- 
ists,  they  frequently  wrote  as  follows  :— "  None 
lament  more  than  ourselves  the  abuse  which  is 
frequently  made  of  the  maxims  of  the  Church  of 
France."  Again,  when  under  the  Restoration,  the 
ministers  of  state  addressed  circulars  to  the  bishops, 
urging  the  teaching  of  the  Four  Articles  in  the  cleri- 
cal seminaries,  even  the  Gallican  members  of  the 
Episcopate  either  disregarded  the  injunction,  or 
replied  that  it  was  beyond  the  competence  of  the 
civil  power. 

Again,  some  Galileans,  like  Bishop  Frayssinous 
and  others,  sought  to  explain  the  Four  Articles  in 
an  Ultramontane  sense.f  But  a  party  that  excuses 
itself,  is  already  doomed.  "  Qui  s' excuse,  s'accuse," 
says  the  French  proverb. 

Thus  have  we  seen  how  by  its  evil  results,  Galli- 
canism  had  been  gradually  losing  its  hold  on  the 
Church  of  France.  Providence  now  raised  up  two 
extraordinary  men  to  give  to  this  doctrine  a  blow, 

*  Under  the  Restoration,  the  secretary  of  Cardinal  Latil,  con- 
fessor to  Charles  X.,  told  me  that  the  bishops  of  France  did  not 
like  to  see  these  questions  discussed. 

t  See  Note  D. 


xxxii  Introduction, 

from  wliich  it  was  never  to  recover,  and  which  was 
the  means  of  brini^ini^  about  that  f^reat  renovation 
of  the  GaHican  Church,  that  is  one  of  the  most  con- 
sohnf^  rch'f^ious  phenomena  of  tlie  age. 

While  Napoleon  was  wac^in^^  war  ai^ainst  relij^ion, 
a  younc^  man,  yet  a  layman,  in  the  remote  province 
of  faithful  ]5rittany,  took  up  his  pen  to  vindicate  the 
ri<;hts  of  the  oppressed  Church.  This  was  the  after- 
wards celebrated  Felicite  de  la  Mennais.  He  and 
his  elder  brother,  the  Abbe  Jean  de  la  Mennais,* 
be^ran  in  1808  a  joint  work,  entitled  *'  Tradition  de 
ri\L^lise  sur  ITnstitution  des  Kveques,"  and  wliich,  in 
three  volumes,  was  published  in  the  year  18 14. 

The  object  of  this  work  was  to  prove  at^ainst 
Napoleon  and  some  of  the  servile  prelates  who 
surrounded  him,  that  ecclesiastical  jurisdiction  has 
been  imparted  immediately  to  Peter  ahme,  in  order 
to  be  communicated  to  the  other  pastors,  or,  to  use 
the  words  of  St  Optatus,  bishop  of  Milevi,  "  that 
St  Peter  has  alone  received  the  keys  of  the  king- 
dom of  Heaven,  in  order  to  communicate  them 
to  the  other  i)astors"  (Contra  Parm.  1.  7,  n.  3). 
Amoni^  other  thin<^s,  this  book  shows  that  the  great 
Eastern  patriarchates  of  Antioch  and  Alexandria 
were  founded  by  St  Peter  and  his  disciple  St  Mark, 
and  that  the  later  patriarchal  sees  of  Jerusalem  and 

*  The  Al)l)c  Jean  de  la  Mennais  collected  for  this  work  various 
passages  from  C!ouncils,  Pajxal  epistles,  and  from  the  l*'athers  and 
Doctors  of  the  Church.  The  younger  brother  then  carefully  revised 
the  passages  so  collected,  and  afterwards  dictated  to  the  older  the 
composition.  The  Abbe  Jean  was  a  learned  theologian  and  can- 
onist, and  was  oflen  em])loyed  by  bishops  as  (Jrand  Vicar  in  their 
dioceses.  He  founded  a  religious  order  for  jiopular  instruction  ; 
anil  at  times  there  were  not  fewer  than  a  thousand  religious  under 
his  direction,  scattered  through  liritlaiiy  and  the  neighbouring  jiro- 
vinces,  and  spreading  even  to  the  West  Indies.  This  apostolic  man, 
who  devoted  much  time  to  preaching  and  other  duties  of  the  sacred 
ministry,  exercised,  as  we  shall  see,  great  influence  on  the  ecclesi- 
astical affairs  of  France,  Having  reached  an  advanced  age,  he  died 
a  few  years  ago  in  the  odour  of  sanctity. 


Introduction.  xxxiii 

of    CunstcinliiH)[)lc    were    establislied    by    General 
Councils,  confirnied  by  the  Holy  See. 

The  whole  book  is  a  learned  refutation  of  the 
errors  of  Antonio  dc  Dominis,  Richer,  Van  Espen, 
Ellies  Dupin,  Tabaraud,  and  Jansenists  like  him. 
This  vigorous  defence  of  the  prerogatives  of  the 
Holy  See  was,  I  believe,  the  first  of  the  kind,  which 
since  the  time  of  Petit-Didier,  a  hundred  years  be- 
fore, had  appeared  in  France.  It  was  the  prelude 
to  a  great  work,  that,  published  in  the  same  country 
in  the  year  1819,  constitutes  an  era  in  the  history 
of  the  French  Church. 

The  work  adverted  to  is  the  "  Du  Tape,"  by  the 
great  Count  de  Maistre.  Its  aim  is  to  vindicate 
the  full  spiritual  prerogatives  of  the  Holy  See,  and 
the  infallibility  of  its  dogmatic  decrees,  as  well  as 
to  point  out  its  beneficial  action  in  the  advance- 
ment of  civilization,  and  the  great  utility  in  the 
Middle  Age  of  its  political  umpirage.  This  work 
was  followed  soon  afterwards  by  a  smaller  treatise, 
entitled  "  De  I'lCglise  Gallicane,"  and  which  may 
be  looked  upon  as  its  sequel.  In  the  first  book  of 
this  treatise,  the  author  shows  that  first  Calvinism, 
and  then  Jansenism,  which  was  a  sort  of  mitigated  / 
and  di.sguised  Calvinism,  had  fostered  in  France  a  j 
spirit  of  opposition  to  the  Holy  See.  In  the  second 
book,  he  analyzes  and  discusses  the  Gallican  system, 
the  Declaration  of  1682,  the  affair  of  the  Regalia, 
and  the  liberties  of  the  Church  of  France. 

These  two  productions  of  the  illustrious  Count 
by  their  learning,  force  of  reasoning,  depth  of  ob- 
servation, playful  wit,  lively  and  sometimes  lofty 
eloquence,  made  the  deepest  impression  on  the 
h>ench  mind.  Among  the  laity,  and  especially 
among  .statesmen  and  diplomatists,  their  influence 
was  most  salutary.* 

*  TIic  publicntioii  of  the  author's  "  Soirees  dc  St  Petersbourg  ;  or, 

C 


xxxiv  l7itroductio7i. 

The  Abbe  Felicite  de  la  Mennais,  who,  in  the 
meantime,  by  his  work,  "  Essai  sur  I'lndifference 
en  matiere  de  Reh'gion/'  had  acquired  a  vast  re- 
putation, gave,  in  1820,  in  a  series  of  able  articles 
in  the  journal  "■  Le  Defenseur,"  a  critique  of  the 
"Du  Pape."*  By  this  critique  he  incurred  the 
displeasure  of  not  a  few  members  of  the  French 
Episcopate,  who  still  clung  to  the  maxims  of  1682. 
There  was,  if  I  am  not  mistaken,  but  one  indi- 
vidual in  that  Episcopal  body,  who  then  openly 
and  frankly  defended  the  Roman  doctrine  touching 
the  hierarchy.  This  was  the  holy  archbishop  of 
Bordeaux,  Mgr.  D'Aviau.f 

But  in  the  French  Episcopate  itself,  a  great 
change  of  opinion  was  about  to  take  place.  In  the 
year  1822,  a  new  Concordat  was  completed  be- 
tween the  Holy  See  and  King  Louis  XVIII., 
whereby  twenty  new  sees  were  to  be  erected,  mak- 
ing in  all  eighty.  The  Grand-Almoner,  on  whom 
devolves  the  right  of  advising  the  Crown  as  to  the 
nomination  to  bishoprics,  was  at  that  time  the 
Cardinal  Prince  de  Croi,  and  his  secretary  was  the 
Abbe'  Jean  de  la  Mennais  already  spoken  of.  The 
latter  recommended  to  his  patron  the  names  of 
tw^enty  ecclesiastics,  all  known  for  their  devotion 
to  the  Holy  See ;  and  among  those  ecclesiastics 

The  Vindication  of  Providence  in  the  Government  of  the  "World" — a 
posthumous  work  that  appeared  in  1 82 1 — carried  his  reputation  to 
the  highest  pitch.  Count  Joseph  de  Maistre,  in  my  humble  opinion, 
as  a  thinker  and  a  vi^riter,  takes  his  place  in  French  literature  im- 
mediately after  Bossuet  and  Pascal. 

*  His  own  work,  "  Tradition  de  I'Eglise,"  had  been  duly  appre- 
ciated by  the  noble  Count. 

fin  1815  he  wrote  as  follows  to  a  French  prelate: — "For 
upwards  of  one  hundred  and  thirty  years,  twelve  consecutive  Popes 
have  never  ceased  to  disapprove  (improuver)  the  Declaration  of 
1682,  and  for  a  hundred  and  thirty  years  the  Papal  authority  is 
opposed  by  declarations,  prosecutions,  and  decrees."  Henrion, 
Hist,  de  I'Eglise,  t.  13,  p.  14. 


Introduction,  xxxv 

so  presented  was  Mgr.  de  Bonald — the  worthy  son 
of  an  illustrious  father — then  promoted  from  the 
bishopric  of  Puy  to  the  archiepiscopal  see  of  Lyons. 
This  excellent  prelate,  after  having  for  so  many 
years  edified  the  Church  by  his  great  virtues  and 
charities,  and  adorned  it  by  his  wisdom  and  learn- 
ing, was  this  very  year,  just  before  the  promulga- 
tion of  that  definition  for  which  he  had  helped  to 
prepare  the  way,  summoned  to  his  eternal  reward. 

In  1824,  the  Abbe  F.  de  la  Mennais  and  his  dis- 
tinguished disciples,  the  Abbes  Gerbet  and  Salinis, 
both  afterwards  promoted  to  the  episcopal  dig- 
nity, the  learned  Abbe  Rohrbacher,  the  Count 
O'Mahony,  M.  Laurentie,  now  the  venerable  chief 
editor  of  the  Union,  and  others,  founded  a  monthly 
journal,  entitled,  ''  Le  Memorial  CatJioliqne!'  This 
journal,  which  exercised  a  great  influence  over  the 
clergy,  was  chiefly  devoted  to  the  discussion  of 
ecclesiastical  subjects,  and  among  other  matters, 
carried  on  a  warm  controversy  against  the  Galilean 
opinions.  Though  the  bounds  of  moderation  were 
occasionally  transgressed,  yet  the  rights  of  the 
Holy  See,  the  freedom  of  the  Church,  and  the 
cause  of  Christian  education,  were  vigorously  de- 
fended in  its  pages. 

In  1825,  and  in  the  following  year,  the  Abbe  F. 
de  la  Mennais  published  the  first  and  the  second 
parts  of  a  work,  entitled,  "  De  la  Religion,  con- 
sideree  dans  ses  rapports  avec  I'ordre  politique  et 
civil."  In  the  first  part,  the  author  describes  the 
state  of  political  society  in  France,  such  as  the 
Revolution  had  made  it,  and  laments  the  indiffer- 
ence of  the  State  as  such  for  religion.  This  he 
justly  calls  political  atheism.  This  stigma,  yet  with- 
out trespassing  on  the  constitutional  principle  of 
religious  Toleration,  the  CathoHc  and  monarchical 
party  had  long  striven  to  remove  by  degrees  from 


XXX  vi  Introduclion. 

the  legislation  of  the  country  ;  their  leader,  how- 
ever, M.  de  Villele,  after  his  advent  to  power,  but 
very  imperfectly  carried  out  their  plans. 

In  the  second  part,  the  author  combats  the  Gal- 
ilean maxims  with  great  learning  and  eloquence. 
Here  occurs  the  celebrated  passage,  so  character- 
istic of  his  spirit  of  rigid  deduction  :  *'  No  Pope,  no 
Church  ;  no  Church,  no  Christianity ;  no  Christi- 
anity, no  religion,  at  least  for  a  people  that  was 
once  Christian  ;  and,  consequently,  no  society." 

It  is  to  be  lamented,  however,  that  the  Abbe  de 
la  Mennais  had  not  discussed  the  first  article  of 
the  Galilean  Declaration  in  the  same  manner  as 
the  illustrious  Count  de  Maistre,  in  his  work,  "  Du 
Pape."  Not  content  with  defending  the  right  of 
the  Sovereign  Pontiff,  and  of  the  Church,  to  cen- 
sure injustice  in  the  political  order  of  things — a 
right  exercised  at  all  times,  and  in  the  present  age, 
by  Pope  Pius  VII.  in  regard  to  the  first  Napoleon, 
and  by  the  present  illustrious  Pontiff  in  regard  to 
King  Victor  Emmanuel — the  abbe  sought  to  enforce 
in  the  present  divided  state  of  Christendom,  the 
political  effects  of  a  regal  excommunication.  Eccle- 
siastics and  laymen  most  devoted  to  the  Holy  See 
disapproved  of  this  course  ;  and  among  others,  an 
illustrious  German  Catholic  writer,  who,  after  the 
highest  commendations  on  Count  de  Maistre, 
observes,  with  evident  allusion  to  the  Abbe  de  la 
Mennais,  that  other  more  rhetorical  defenders  of 
religion  in  France,  by  their  imprudence,  sometimes 
injure  rather  than  serve  the  cause  they  mean  to 
defend.* 

The  ministry  of  M.  de  Villele  committed  the 
great  imprudence  of  prosecuting  this  publication, 

*  Frederick  Schlegel  in  his  "  Philosophy  of  History,"  Bohn's 
edition,  p.  464.  The  learned  and  able  Baron  d'Eckstein,  too,  in  his 
journal,  Le  CathoUqiic^  expressed  the  same  opinion. 


Introdtiction.  xxxvli 

and  of  bringing-  its  illustrious  author  before  the  tri- 
bunal of  the"Correctional  Police."  This  prosecution, 
and  the  previous  abrupt  dismissal  of  M.  de  Chateau- 
briand from  office,  were  the  two  greatest  political 
blunders  the  Royalist  Administration  ever  fell  into. 

On  the  charge  of  an  attack  on  the  rights  of  the 
Crown,  the  Abbe  de  la  Mennais  was  acquitted  by 
the  court,  but  found  guilty  on  the  accusation  of 
attacking  the  Declaration  of  1682,  which,  in  despite 
of  the  freedom  of  religious  opinions  guaranteed  by 
the  Charter  of  18 14,  was  declared  to  be  the  law  of 
the  land.  The  author  was  mulcted  in  a  small 
pecuniary  fine. 

Thirteen  bishops,  in  an  address  to  the  King, 
Charles  X.,*  condemned  in  strong  terms  those  pass- 
ages in  the  incriminated  work,  that  assailed  the 
Declaration  of  1682.  Other  bishops  endorsed  the 
censure ;  some  gave  it  but  a  qualified  adhesion  ; 
while  others  again  refused  to  subscribe  it. 

In  the  year  1828,  the  Abbe  de  la  Mennais  pub- 
lished his  work,  entitled,  **  Des  Progres  de  la  Reli- 
gion, et  de  la  Guerre  contre  TEglise."  There  are 
in  this  production  many  very  able  and  eloquent 
passages,  and  several  remarkable  predictions  of 
events  which  afterwards  occurred.  But  on  the 
whole,  there  is  a  tone  of  asperity  and  violence, 
which  much  detracts  from  its  merits.  The  prose- 
cution the  author  had  sustained,  and  his  conse- 
quent alienation  from  the  Court  and  the  Royalist 
party,  as  well  as  from  many  of  the  bishops,  had 
embittered  his  feelings,  and  produced  an  irritation 
which  betrayed  itself  in  his  recent  writings.f     The 


*  This  was  the  last  formal  act  of  Episcopal  Gallicanism. 

t  In  the  year  following  the  publication  of  this  work,  I  took  the 
liberty  of  remarking  to  him,  "  that  there  was  a  certain  nervous  irri- 
tation manifest  in  his  recent  writings."  He  replied,  '-Ah!  c'est 
bien  possible,  c'est  bien  possible." 


xxxviii  Introduction. 

calmer,  more  equable  dignity  that  had  pervaded 
his  earlier  works,  was  now  gone.  And,  unfortun- 
ately, the  severe,  and  even  unjust  comments  which 
some  prelates  employed  in  regard  to  certain  anti- 
Gallican  passages  in  the  work  in  question,  provoked 
replies,  wherein  he  sometimes  forgot  the  reverence 
due  to  the  episcopal  office. 

In  the  times  immediately  preceding  the  Revolu- 
tion of  July,  I  perceived  with  pain  the  clouds  of  a 
false  political  Liberalism,  by  degrees,  gathering 
over  his  mind.  And  after  that  catastrophe,  which 
has  proved  to  France  the  source  of  so  many  evils, 
the  faithful  Breton,  w^ho  had  once  uttered  the  cry, 
"  Vive  le  Roi  quand-meme,"  now  in  the  journal 
V Avenir,  raised  the  wild  cry,  ''  Dieu  et  la  Liberie;" 
forgetting  that  if  religion  hallows  and  sustains  civil 
liberty,  that  liberty  must  be  within  the  limits,  and 
under  the  conditions  of  social  order ; — an  order 
that  has  its  foundations  in  Nature  itself.  Thus  did 
a  false  motto  betray  the  political  exaggerations 
and  errors  of  this  journal.  In  pure  theology,  the 
Avenir  remained  quite  sound  ;  but  its  politico- 
theological  tenets,  which  its  writers  had  submitted 
to  the  judgment  of  the  Holy  See,  at  last  drew 
down  the  censures  of  the  Sovereign  Pontiff.  It 
Vv^as  repugnance  to  those  decisions,  and  then  revolt 
against  that  supreme  authority,  which,  by  degrees, 
led  my  once  great  but  unfortunate  friend  and 
master  into  those  fearful  intellectual  aberrations, 
that  ended  in  his  ruin. 

But  with  the  Revolution  of  July,  he  "  had  finished 
his  course."  He  had,  by  his  "  Essai  sur  I'lndiffer- 
ence  en  matiere  de  Religion  "  reclaimed  very  many 
Protestants  and  Deists ;  and  if,  by  his  philosophy, 
he  sometimes  had  unduly  depressed  the  powers  of 
human  reason,  he  had,  by  a  mass  of  learned  testi- 
mony, illustrated  the  doctrines  of  Primitive  Reve- 


hitrodiiction.  xxxlx 

lation ;  had  helped,  by  his  writings  against  Galli- 
canism,  to  introduce  into  France  sounder  views  as 
to  the  Papacy  ;  had  inculcated  in  his  ''  Guide  du 
Premier  Age,"  and  in  the  admirable  notes  appended 
to  his  Translation  of  the  "  Following  of  Christ,"  a 
spirit  of  manly,  fervent  piety ;  and,  lastly,  in  his 
various  miscellaneous  writings,  had  advocated  with 
great  vigour  and  eloquence,  and  sometimes  with 
profoundness  of  observation,  the  reform  of  public 
education,  the  obser\'ance  of  the  Sunday,  the  free- 
dom of  the  Church,  the  union  of  Church  and 
State,  as  well  as  the  rights  of  the  Crown,  and  the 
liberties  of  the  oppressed  provinces  of  France. 

When  the  Revolution  of  1830  broke  out,  a  great 
change  with  respect  to  the  maxims  of  1682  had 
already  taken  place  in  the  minds  of  a  large  por- 
tion of  the  clergy  and  of  the  laity  in  France. 
The  democratic  politics  of  the  journal  UAvcnir, 
followed  later  by  the  sad  fall  of  its  chief  editor, 
tended,  I  think,  rather  to  retard  the  progress  of 
what  are  called  the  Ultramontane  doctrines.  But 
as  soon  as  matters  had  been  cleared  up  by  the 
several  Encyclicals  of  Pope  Gregory  XVI.,  those 
doctrines  in  France  pursued  their  onward  course. 
During  the  reign  of  Louis  Philippe,  and  under  the 
second  Empire,  we  have  seen  them  professed  by 
the  most  distinguished  Catholic  writers,  and  the 
most  influential  organs  of  Catholic  opinion.  In 
most  diocesan  seminaries,  they  have  been  taught, 
and,  not  unfrequently,  they  have  been  proclaimed 
even  in  provincial  councils.  A  few  months  back, 
an  august  prince — the  last  hope,  perhaps,  of  his 
great  but  unfortunate  country  —  declared  that, 
though  he  had  been  brought  up  in  the  Gallican 
maxims,  reflection  had  taught  him  now  to  reject 
them,  convinced  that  they  had  not  a  little  contri- 
buted towards  the  misfortunes  of  his  Royal  House. 


xl  I 71  tro  due  Hon. 

The  bulk  of  the  Legitimist  party,  as  has  been  lately 
evinced  in  no  unequivocal  manner,  shares  the  con- 
victions of  the  prince.  Independently  of  religious 
feelings,  they,  doubtless,  are  sensible  that  the 
recent  solemn  affirmation  of  the  spiritual  royalty 
of  Christ's  vicar  will  ultimately  tend  to  consolidate 
anew  teinporal  monarchy^  and  all  its  concomitant 
institutions.* 

Lastly,  in  the  glorious  Council  this  year  assem- 
bled, and  which,  by  its  definition  respecting  the 
Papal  prerogatives,  has  crowned  the  desires  of  so 
many  of  the  Churches  children,  fifty  French  pre- 
lates, by  their  words  and  acts,  have  ratified  the  old 
traditions  of  the  Church  of  Gaul.  While  in  Italy, 
in  Spain,  in  South  America,  in  Ireland,  and  in 
Switzerland,  where  the  dogmatic  inerrancy  of  the 
Holy  See  has  but  very  rarely  been  denied  within 
the  pale  of  the  Church,  the  laity  have  generally 
deemed  it  more  prudent  to  leave  the  final  settle- 
ment of  the  question  in  the  hands  of  the  Episco- 
pate; the  case  in  other  countries  has  been  very  dif- 
ferent. In  France,  where,  especially  since  1682,  and 
in  Belgium,  where,  duringthe  domination  oftheFirst 
Napoleon,  Gallicanism  had  been  made  such  a  for- 
midable weapon  of  religious  tyranny;  the  laity,  as 
well  as  the  second  order  of  clergy,  have  in  many 
cases  earnestly  petitioned  the  assembled  Fathers 
to  relieve  them  of  the  moral  incubus. 

Simultaneous  with  the  anti-Gallican  reaction  in 
France,  was  the  course  of  religious  thought  in 
Catholic  Germany.  Here  the  evils  of  Febronian- 
ism  and  Josephism  induced  earnest  and  intellectual 
Catholics  to  cling  more  closely  to  the  Rock  of 
Peter.  The  great  lay  philosophers,  historians,  and 
publicists  who,  in  the  last  generation,  did  so  much 
to  renovate  the  spirit  of  religion  in  the  country 
*  See  Note  E. 


Introduction.  xli 

adverted  to,  Stolberg,  Frederick  Schlegel,*  Adam 
Müller,  Haller,  Hurter,  Görres,  Jarcke,  and  others, 
were  known  for  their  aversion  to  the  Gallican  doc- 
trines. Eminent  canonists,  like  Walter,  Beidtel,  and 
Phillips,  as  well  as  such  very  distinguished  divines  as 
Klee,  Dieringer,  and  Dollinger  himself  in  his  earlier 
works,  have  more  or  less  vigorously  defended  the 
doctrinal  infallibility  of  the  Holy  See.  Nay,  this 
doctrine  was  openly  enunciated  in  various  provin- 
cial councils  held  within  the  last  few  years  in  Ger- 
many, Austria,  and  Hungary ;  and  accordingly, 
the  attitude  observed  by  many  prelates  of  those 
countries  in  the  Conciliar  proceedings  prior  to  the 
Definition,  excited  no  little  surprise  at  Rome  and 
elsewhere. 

To  conclude,  if,  on  occasion  of  the  recent  solemn 
Definition — pregnant  as  it  is  with  such  beneficial 
results  to  the  Church — I  might  be  allowed  to  ex- 
press my  own  sense  of  personal  exultation;  I  could 
observe  that  the  great  regeneration  of  the  Church 
of  France,  which  has  occurred  in  the  present  cen- 
tury, was,  according  to  all  human  calculation,  a 
necessary  prelude  to  this  momentous  decision. 
But  the  parties  chiefly  instrumental  in  bringing 
about  that  spiritual  renovation,  were  many  of  them 
my  own  personal  friends  and  teachers.  After  the 
great  Count  de  Maistre,  to  whom  the  first  place  is 
due,  it  was  the  modern  TertuUian,  before  his  fatal 
aberrations,  it  was  Mgr.  Gerbet  and  Mgr.  Salinis, 
the  Abbe  Rohrbacher,  the  Pere  Lacordaire,  M. 
Laurentie,  and  others,  who  had  the  chief  hand  in 
the  undermining  of  the  Gallican  system.  Those 
memories  are  most  cheering  to  me  at  the  present 
hour ;  and  while,  as  it  often  happens,  the  ideals  of 
youth  remain  unrealized,  and  so  many  earthly 
hopes  have  vanished,  like  the  false  mirage  of  the 
*  See  Note  F. 


xlll  Introduction. 

desert,  how  consoling  is  it  to  find  in  the  highest 
intellectual  region — in  the  sphere  of  religion — the 
aspirations  of  youth  fulfilled  in  age  ! 

Again,  is  it  possible  to  repress  a  feeling  of  patri- 
otic delight,  when  I  behold  those  British  and  Irish 
Churches,  scarcely  represented  at  Trent,  playing 
so  important  a  part  in  the  great  CEcumenical 
Synod  now  assembled  at  Rome ;  when,  among 
other  things,  we  see  on  one  hand  the  Archbishop 
of  Westminster  preluding  its  deliberations  by  so 
learned  and  eloquent  an  appeal  in  behalf  of  the 
prerogatives  of  the  Holy  See ;  and  on  the  other, 
the  Chancellor  of  the  University,  which  I  have  the 
honour  to  belong  to,  and  its  former  Vice-Rector, 
the  Cardinal-Archbishop  of  Dublin,  and  the  Arch- 
bishop of  Cashel,  ranking  by  their  learning,  wis- 
dom, and  eloquence  among  the  greatest  luminaries 
of  that  Council ! 

Let  us  hope  and  pray  that  the  demons  of  war, 
and  of  anarchy,  which  but  yesterday  lay  crouching 
at  the  feet  of  the  assembled  Fathers,  and  which, 
since  their  temporary  dispersion,  have  by  the  dread 
flapping  of  their  wings,  filled  the  world  with  dis- 
may and  havoc,  may  yet  be  laid  when  those 
Fathers  shall  re-assemble ! 


London,  ist  September  \%~,Q), 

S^foA^^  tC^jU  c^^Ui^^^s^  I'V-c^ 


The  works  chiefly  made  use  of  in  this  historic  sketch 
of  GaUicanism  are  the  following  : — 

1.  "  Recherches  Historiques  sur  TAssemblee  du  Clerge  de  1682," 

par  M.  Charles  Gerin.     Paris,  1869. 

2.  "Memoires  pour  Sei-vir  ä  I'Histoire  Ecclesiastique  du  Dix- 

huitieme  Siede,"  par  M.  Picot.     Paris,  1815. 

3.  "  L'Histoire   de   I'EgHse,"   par  I'Abbe  Rohrbacher.       Paris, 

1850. 

4.  "L'Histoire  de  I'Eglise,"  par  M.  Henrion.     Paris,  1840. 


"  Manuel   du  Droit    Ecclesiastique,"    par   M.    Ic    Professeur 
Walter,  Trad.  Francaise.      Paris,  1850. 


6.  "  L'Histoire  du  Droit  Ecclesiastique,"  par  M.  Philips,  Trad. 

Frangaise.     Paris,  1858. 

7.  "  Le   Memorial  Catholique,"  Ouviage    Periodique   de    1S24 

jusqu'a  Pan  1830.     Paris. 


NOTES   TO  THE   INTRODUCTION. 


Note  A. 

That  the  great  Bishop  of  Meaux  had  a  certain  courtly 
weakness,  the  following  anecdote  related  by  jM.  Ge'rin 
will  show  : — 

In  1 68 1  Bossuet  proposed,  in  the  Assembly  of  the 
Clergy,  that  his  own  metropolitan,  Mgr.  de  Harlay, 
Archbishop  of  Paris,  should,  together  with  the  Arch- 
bishop of  Rheims,  be  induced  to  preside,  and  this  be- 
cause he  had  given  so  many  proofs  of  his  high  capacity ; 
and  that  the  title  President  of  Councils,  formerly  given 
to  the  great  Osius,  might  be  applied  to  Mgr.  d'Harlay. 
Yet  of  that  very  same  prelate  Bossuet,  twenty  years 
afterwards,  spoke  to  his  secretary,  the  Abbe  Ledieu,  as 
follows  :— "  Feu  M.  de  Paris  (the  Archbishop  Harlay) 
ne  faisait  en  tout  cela  (namely,  the  proceedings  of  the 
Assembly)  que  flatter  la  cour,  ecouter  les  ministres,  et 
suivre  ä  Vaveiigle  Inirs  volonüs  co?nme  un  valet'' — lourjial 
de  Ledieu,  t.  i.,  p.  8. 

Note  B. 

the  schism  of  the  petite  eglise. 

'*  Un  resultat  de  cette  opposition  des  trente-six  eveques 
au  Concordat,  fut  une  espece  de  secte  ou  de  schisme, 
appeM  les  Anti-concordataires  ou  la  Petite  Eglise  ;  secte 
qui  se  faisoit  un  merite  de  decrier  le  Pape,  et  son  autorite; 
schisme  dans  lequel  paroit  etre  mort  M.  de  Theminnes 
ancien  eveque  de  ^\q\%!' —Rohrbacher,  Hist,  de  V Eglise, 
t.  xxvii.,  p.  651. 


xlvl  Notes. 


Note  C. 

the  constitutional  schism. 

In  a  very  interesting  work  published  by  the  Pere 
Theiner,  entitled,  "  Documens  Inedits  Relatifs  aux 
Affaires  Religieuses  de  la  France  1790  ä  1800,"  and 
which  he  extracted  from  the  archives  of  the  Vatican, 
we  find  admirable  letters  addressed  to  Pope  Pius  VI. 
by  the  Abbe  Emery,  Superior  of  St  Sulpice,  relating 
(among  other  things)  his  interviews  with  the  constitu- 
tional clergy  of  France.  He  speaks  of  the  Bishop  of 
Viviers,  who  was  one  of  the  four  French  prelates  that 
embraced  the  schismatical  constitution  of  1790. 

A  remarkable  avowal  which  this  bishop  made  to  the 
Abbe  Emery,  confirms  the  observation  in  the  text  that 
the  Galilean  maxims  were  at  least  an  indirect  source  of 
that  schism  : — "  II  m'a  souvent  temoigne  qu'il  avoit  e'te 
trompe  par  les  libertes  de  I'Eglise  Gallicane,  et  que  ce 
n'etoit  qu'en  les  suivant  et  les  poussant  jusqu'aux  der- 
nieres  consequences,  qu'il  avoit  ete  mene  si  loin ;  qu'il 
meditait  une  declaration  de  ses  sentimens  ä  ce  sujet,  qui 
etonnerait  beaucoup  de  monde,  et  que  les  theologiens 
qu'on  appelle  en  France  Ultra7?ioiifai?is  lui  paroissoient 
les  seuls  conse'quents." — Documms  Inedits,  t.  i.,  p.  442. 
Pans,  1857. 

Note  D. 

In  the  text  it  is  stated  that  Bishop  Frayssinous  some- 
times interpreted  the  Galilean  maxims  in  an  Ultramon- 
tane sense.  In  the  work  of  Dom  Gueranger,  entitled 
"  De  la  Monarchie  Pontificale,"  I  find  a  passage  bearing 
upon  this  point : — "  Au  temps  du  premier  empire,"  says 
he,  "  M.  Frayssinous  employait  son  zble  ä  maintenir  dans 
la  croyance  et  la  pratique  chretiennes  un  certain  nombre 
d'eleves  de  droit  et  de  medecine  ä  Paris.  Durant  la 
crise  violente  du  Sacerdoce  et  de  FEmpire,  ces  jeunes 
gens,  dont  M.  Perdrau  faisoit  partie,  lui  dirent  un  jour: 


Notes.  xlvll 

'  Monsieur  FAbbe,  la  controverse  est  fort  animee,  et 
nous  avons  besoin  de  savoir  de  quel  cote  la  conscience 
nous  oblige  de  nous  ranger.  Devons-nous  etre  Galil- 
eans ?  Devons-nous  etre  tlltramontains  ?  '  M.  Frayssi- 
nous  leur  re'pondit :  '  Messieurs,  vous  n'etes  pas,  et 
vous  ne  pouvez  etre  theologiens ;  je  n'ai  done  qu'un  seul 
conseil  a  vous  donner  :  soyez  Ultramontains ;  je  le  pre- 
fere.  Vous  conserverez  plus  aise'mcnt  ainsi  la  vraie  foi. 
Si  vous  vouliez  etre  Galileans,  je  eralndrais  que  vous  ne 
fussiez  bientot  entraines  dans  Terreur.'  On  doit  rendre 
justice  a  la  loyaut^  qui  dicta  cette  reponse  ....  Main- 
tenant  je  le  demande,  quelle  est  la  securite  d'une  doc- 
trine que  Ton  ne  peut  exposer  en  public,  sans  avoir  ä 
craindre  pour  la  foi  des  auditeurs  ?  " — De  la  Monarchie 
Pontificale^  p.  217. 

The  speech  delivered  by  Bishop  Frayssinous  in  1826 
at  the  tribune  of  the  Legislative  Chamber,  recounts  some 
of  the  causes  which  had  disgusted  the  French  with  the 
doctrines  of  1682. 

Note  E. 

spiritual  and  temporal  monarchy, 

The  Church,  it  is  truly  said,  needs  not  kings  and 
emperors ;  but  civil  society  in  great  states  needs  them ; 
and  this  is  especially  true  under  the  Christian  Dispensa- 
tion, which,  by  the  abolition  of  slavery,  has  indefinitely 
multiplied  popular  suffrages,  and  therefore  aggravated 
the  difficulties  of  popular  government.  . 


Note  F. 

Frederick  Schlegel,  who  was  usually  so  gentle  and  so 
guarded  in  all  his  judgments  on  men  and  things,  has 
expressed  himself  in  regard  to  the  Galilean  system  with 
a  severity  that  may  be  deemed  excessive.  "  But  this 
disguised  half-schism  of  the  Galilean  Church,"  says  he, 
"  not  less  fatal  in  its  historical  effects  than  the  open 


xlvlii  Notes, 

schism  of  the  Greeks,  has,  down  to  the  period  of  the 
Restoration,  contributed  very  materially  towards  the 
decline  of  religion  in  France." — Philosophy  of  History, 
translated  by  myself,  p.  426.     London,  Bohn's  ed.,  1850. 

I  well  remember  that  the  eminent  publicist,  Ludwig 
von  Haller,  author  of  the  great  work,  "  The  Restoration 
of  Political  Science,"  once  wrote  in  the  "  Memorial 
Catholique,"  that  those  CathoHcs  who  called  the  de- 
fenders of  Papal  Infallibility  Ultramontanes^  acted  like 
the  Greek  heretics  and  schismatics,  who  gave  to  faithful 
Catholics  the  appellation  of  Ulira7narines. 

The  Abbe  de  la  Mennais,  who  had  been  instrumental 
in  converting  to  the  Catholic  faith  so  many  Protestants 
and  infidels  of  France,  Switzerland,  Germany,  and 
England,  once  said  to  me,  that  he  scarcely  ever  knew  a 
convert  that  was  favourable  to  the  Galilean  maxims. 


^Äl^ 


U«%T4, 


CHAPTER  I. 

THE  FIVE  ARTICLES  OF  THE  ''  ALLGEMEINE 
ZEITUNG." 


N  the  month  of  March    1869,  the   Allgc- 
meine  Zeitung,  of  Augsburg,    pubh'shed 
five  articles,  entitled  "  The  Council  and 
the  Civilta/''     In  these  articles,  on  occa- 
sion of  a  Fiendi  correspondence,  under  the  date 


ERRATA  IN  ANTI-JANUS. 

At  p.  150,  "for  the  absolute  will  ef  a  singular  individual",  read 
"  for  the  absolute  will  of  a  single  individual". 

At  p.  7G,  "  for  so  we  reply",  dele  so. 

At  p.  95,  for  ^^so  we  can  only  reply",  read  "  then  we  can  only 
reply",  etc. 

At  p.  103,  for  "so  we  are  led  to  regard",  read  "  we  are  naturally 
led  to  regard",  etc. 

At  p.  109,  for  ^'so  there  is  for  other  churches",  etc.,  read  "  there 
is  on  the  other  hand  for  other  churches",  etc. 

At  p.  23^,  for  "  so  the  prospect  of  honours  and  emoluments", 
read  '•  then  the  prospect  of  honours  and  emoluments",  etc. 

At  p.  256,  for  "  so  this  clause  is  found",  etc.,  read  ''yet  this  clause 
in  found"  etc. 


xlvlii  Notes. 

schism  of  the  Greeks,  has,  down  to  the  period  of  the 
Restoration,  contributed  very  materially  towards  the 
decline  of  religion  in  France." — Philosophy  of  History^ 
translated  by  myself,  p.  426.     London,  Bohn's  ed.,  1850. 

I  well  remember  that  the  eminent  publicist,  Ludwig 
von  Haller,  author  of  the  great  work,  ''  The  Restoration 
of  Political  Science,"  once  wrote  in  the  "  Memorial 
Catholique,"  that  those  Catholics  who  called  the  de- 
fenders of  Papal  Infallibility  Ultramonfaftes,  acted  like 
the  Greek  heretics  and  schismatics,  who  gave  to  faithful 
Catholics  the  appellation  of  Ulirajiiariiies. 

The  Abbe  de  la  Mennais,  who  had  been  instrumental 
in  converting  to  the  Catholic  faith  so  many  Protestants 
and  infidels  of  France,  Switzerland,  Germany,  and 
England,  once  said  to  me,  that  he  scarcely  ever  knew  a 
convert  that  was  favourable  to  the  Galilean  maxims. 


CHAPTER  I. 

THE  FIVE  ARTICLES  OF  THE  '*  ALLGEMEINE 
.      ZEITUNG." 


N  the  month  of  March  1869,  the  AHge- 
meine  Zeittnig,  of  Augsburg,  pubh'shed 
five  articles,  entitled  "  The  Council  and 
the  Civilta/^^  In  these  articles,  on  occa- 
sion of  a  French  correspondence,  under  the  date 
of  the  6th  ef  February  of  the  same  year,  in  the 
Roman  Civilta  Cattolica,  a  very  extended  contro- 
versy was  opened  against  the  impending  General 
Council,  "  as  one  chiefly  called  to  satisfy  the  dar- 
ling wishes  of  the  Jesuits,  and  of  that  portion  of 
the  Ctiriay  which  is  led  by  that  order."  In  the 
further  course  of  these  articles,  mingled  with  other 
charges,  the  present  development  of  power  which 
the  Papacy  possesses  is  violently  assailed.  Scarcely 
had  the  five  Articles  approached  their  conclusion, 
when  alarum  trumpets  were  sounded,  and  loudly 
re-echoed  from  the  circles  of  this  party.  It  was 
mostly,  however,  from  the  Atigsburg  Gazette  these 
explosions  were  heard.     A  further^  essay  eulogized 

1  Art.  I.,  in  Nos.  69,  70,  of  the  loth  and  nth  March;  Art.  II., 
in  No.  71  of  the  12th;  Art.  III.,  in  No.  72  of  the  13th;  Art.  IV., 
in  No.  73  of  the  14th  (Append.)  ;  Art.  V.,  in  No.  74  of  the  15th 
March. 

2  "One  Word  more  on  the  Council,"  No.  94  (Append.),  4th 
April  1869. 

A 


2  The  Five  Articles  of 

those  five  excellent  articles,  which,  it  was  said, 
"  will  one  day  form  an  epoch  in  history,"  but  found 
in  them  only  two  defects.  The  author,  it  was  said, 
should  in  the  first  place  have  shown,  that  even  out 
of  France,  and  in  despite  of  the  tyranny  of  the 
Roman  Cnria  and  of  the  order  of  Loyola,  the  pure 
doctrine  and  tradition  had  not,  even  in  Italy,  Spain, 
or  Portugal,  entirely  died  out  among  theologians  or 
canonists.  This  is  proved  by  such  names  as  Tam- 
burini,  the  Itahan  Jansenist ;  by  Solari,  Bishop  of 
Nola  (far  better  known  by  the  refutation  of  Car- 
dinal Gerdil,  than  by  his  own  writings  in  defence 
of  the  Synod  of  Pistoja  and  against  the  bull 
*'  Auctorem  fidei")  ;  by  the  Florentine  scholar 
Fontani  (so  hostile  to  the  Roman  court) ;  as  well 
as  by  his  fellows,  Natali,  Palmieri,  Degola  ;  then 
by  Clement,  Bishop  of  Barcelona,  Villaroig,  and 
Pereira  ;  and  the  writer  adds,  it  is  only  in  the  nine- 
teenth century  all  ecclesiastical  light  has  been  by 
degrees  extinguished.  Further,  this  author  ought 
to  have  pointed  out  the  marks  of  a  genuine,  real 
CEcumenical  Council,  and  should  have  examined 
the  course  which,  in  the  worst  case,  was  to  be  fol- 
lowed by  Catholics.  Next,  we  are  informed  that 
the  Council  of  Florence  is  not  CEcumenical,  and 
that  far  more  doubts  may  be  raised  against  the 
Council  of  Trent  than  against  the  Councils  of  Con- 
stance and  Basle,  discarded  by  Bishop  Dupanloup ; 
that  now,  and  in  despite  of  the  dreadful  condition  of 
the  Church, there  is  no  legitimate  ground  for  the  con- 
vocation of  a  General  Council ;  and  that,  besides,  it 
will  be  devoid  of  all  freedom ;  that  the  Pope  is  merely 
the  caput  minister iale  oi'dx^  Church,  and  that  a  theo- 
logical opinion  can  never  be  raised  into  a  dogma. 

From  this  last  proposition  it  would  follow  that 
the  Immaculate  Conception  of  the  Blessed  Virgin, 
which,  down  to  1854,  was  only  a  pious  opinion,  a 


The  ''Allgemeine  Zetttmg!'  3 

pia  sententia,  would,  even  at  the  present  day,  be 
no  dogma  ;  and  that  the  Church  would  henceforth 
be  incapable  of  giving  a  dogmatic  definition. 

After  such  manifestations  of  profound  theological 
learning,  considerations  drawn  from  canon  law  and 
public  policy  come  to  hand.  Under  the  title,  ''  The 
CEcumenical  Council  and  the  Rights  of  the  State," 
a  warning  cry  is  addressed  to  governments,  not 
to  be  lulled  asleep  by  the  arts  of  the  well-organised 
Ultramontane  party,  not  to  permit  that  the  Catho- 
lic conscience  should  be  misled,  and  new  elements 
of  discord  introduced  among  nations. 

The  fact  is  recalled  to  mind,  that  the  laity,  and 
especially  princes,  belong  to  the  Church  ;  that  the 
first  councils  were  convoked  by  emperors,  and  that 
states  have  in  manifold  ways  a  power  of  guidance. 
The  summoning  of  a  general  Council  by  Pius  IX., 
without  consulting  the  Catholic  governments,  is 
declared  to  be  an  assault  on  the  privileges  of  the 
secular  power.^ 

But  even  the  assembly  of  Protestants  summoned 
to  Worms  on  the  31st  of  last  May,  could  not  refrain 
from  meddling  with  this  matter.  "  The  rash  views 
which  guide  the  powerful  party,  from  which  the 
convocation  of  the  General  Council  proceeded ; 
the  intoxicating  hopes  that  bear  it  up  ;  all  this 
your  journal  has  set  forth  in  articles  written  from  a 
Catholic  point  of  view,  and  which  are  deserving  of 

3  Allgemeine  Zeitung  of  8th  May  1869.  In  direct  opposition  to 
this  opinion,  the  Morning  Post  later  described  the  embarrassment 
of  the  Pontifex  Maximus  in  Rome,  because  no  foreign  Power 
showed  itself  inclined  to  take  part  in  the  Council  ;  and  therefore 
the  project,  which  was  designed  to  produce  the  effect  of  an  explo- 
sion, would  utterly  fail. 

The  Allgetneine  Zeiticng,  which,  in  its  number  of  the  19th  Septem- 
ber 1869,  reports  this  observation,  has  at  the  same  time  the  satisfac- 
tion to  inform  its  readers,  that  the  Standard  refers  to  the  Articles 
against  the  Civilta,  proceeding,  according  to  report,  from  a  Catholic 
pen. 


4  The  Five  Articles  of 

all  consideration."  So  runs  the  announcement  in 
the  great  Gazette  of  Augsburg  ^  on  this  part  of  the 
proceedings  ;  and  this  was  soon  followed  by  the 
summons  signed  by  Bluntschli,  Schellenberg, 
Zittel,  and  other  celebrities  of  the  same  tendency/ 
This  announcement  stated  that,  seven  years  ago, 
Mr  Schmidt,  in  Herzog's  Encyclopedia,  called  the 
Council  of  Trent  the  last  synod  of  the  Catholic 
Church,  and  held  a  new  one  to  be  impossible ;  but 
he  only  thereby  proved,  that  much  may  become 
possible  which  many  of  our  scholars  deemed  im- 
possible. The  objection,  that  this  business  is  a 
mere  internal  concern  of  the  Catholic  Church, 
which  in  no  way  regards  Protestants,  is  met  by  the 
statement — first,  that  the  Catholic  Church  !s  a 
political  power  in  the  world ;  secondly,  that  in 
1864  she  proclaimed  maxims,  which  strike  at  the 
root  of  all  sound  political  life ;  and  thirdly,  that 
the  Papal  invitation  to  the  Council,  dated  the  13th 
September  1868,  requires  an  answer,  which  hitherto 
has  not  been  satisfactorily  given  by  the  ecclesias- 
tical functionaries,  and  hence  must  be  given  by  the 
Protestant  people.  With  this  corresponded  the 
real  acts  of  the  Protestant  Assembly,  which  led  to 
further  discussions,  that  the  Augsburg  Gazette,  at 
least  in  its  columns,  brought  to  a  rapid  close.  The 
spectacle  of  internal  discord  had  been  but  too 
much  exhibited  before  the  "common  foe." 

After  further  ''prospects  of  the  Council,"  in 
regard  to  the  modern  state,  had  been  laid  open,^ 
came  the  ingenious  founder  of  the  Congress  of 
philosophers/  who  expressed   his   admiration  for 

4  Allgemeine  Zeitung^  loth  May  1869.  No.  130. 
^  Allgemeine  Zeitung,  nth  May  1869.  No.  13 1. 
^  Ibid.,  20th  May  1869.     No.  140. 

'  Ibid.  (Append.),  27th  May  1869.  No.  147.  "The  solution  of 
the  religious  question  of  the  day." 


The  ''Allgejneine  Zeihcng!'  5 

the  celebrated  five  Articles  of  March,  and  of  the 
ulterior  ones  of  the  4th  and  14th  April,^  and  desig- 
nated after  Baader  Popery  as  the  weak  side  of 
Catholicism. 

The  address  of  the  Coblentz  laity/  and  the  sum- 
mons issued  from  Carlsruhe,  served  to  increase  the 
sensation.  The  address  of  Carlsruhe  ^°  declared, 
that  ecclesiastical  parliamentary  government,  the 
intellectual  power  of  the  Church,  has  been  for  the 
last  three  centuries  mutilated  by  the  Jesuits, 
demanded  provincial  and  diocesan  synods,  which 
even  the  Council  of  Trent  had  still  recognized,  but 
which  had  never  been  held,"  and  threatened  with  a 
revolt  of  the  popular  mind  of  Germany  against 
Rome. 

If  it  was  soon  proved  that  this  address  came 
from  a  by  no  means  imposing  number  of  Baden 
Catholics  ;  ^^  so  again  a  voice  from  Styria  pointed 
to  the  "  efforts  of  the  Council,  that  were  declaring 
war  against  all  civilization."  '^  Attention  to  the 
Council  was  continually  excited,  particularly  since 
the  diplomatic  steps  taken  by  the  president  of  the 
Bavarian  ministry,^'^  and  since  the  questions  had 
been  proposed   to  the  theological   Faculties,  and 

s  The  last  Article  in  an  extra  Appendix  of  the  Allgemeine  Zeitung 
announces  a  translation  of  the  Five  Articles  into  French,  denounces 
a  couple  of  the  German  Consultors  in  Rome,  as  murderers  of  German 
science,  points  out  the  sunken  authority  of  Kleutgen,  and  so  forth. 

^  Allgemeine  Zeiting,  ist  June  1869.     No.  152,  cf.  No.  197. 

1"/^/^.,  5th  June.     No.  154. 

11  And  from  what  cause  were  they  not  held  ?  Was  it  by  the  fault 
of  the  Jesuits,  or  of  the  Popes,  who  constantly  prescribed  the  con- 
vocation of  such  synods  ?  The  ninth  section  of  the  ordinance  of 
30th  January  1830,  and  the  negotiations  of  the  bishops  with  the 
Governments  of  the  Upper  Rhenish  ecclesiastical  province  can 
throw  some  light  on  this  subject. 

^■^  Allgemeine  Zeitu7ig,  13th  June  1869.     No.  164. 

1=^  7/;/^.,  1 6th  June.     No.  167. 

14  Ibid.,  20th,  2 1  St  June.  Nos.  1 71  and  seq.  *'  Prince  Hohen- 
lohe  and  the  Council." 


6  The  Five' Articles  of 

conjectures  had  been  formed  upon  the  opinion  of 
the  Munich  Faculty/^ 

So  had  the  ''  liberal  Theology/'  as  it  now  calls 
itself,  enlisted  allies  from  all  quarters.  Jansenis- 
tical  and  Febronian  divines,  who  could  discover 
"  ecclesiastical  light"  only  in  the  last  century,  the 
author  of  the  Congress  of  philosophers,  Protestants 
of  the  most  advanced  opinions,  statesmen  and 
diplomatists ;  all  were  arrayed  for  the  struggle 
against  the  Council,  summoned  but  not  yet  assem- 
bled. To  these  might  be  added  the  authors  of 
several  pamphlets,  expressing  themselves  in  a  sense 
more  or  less  similar.  The  Augsburg  organ  more 
especially  devoted  itself  to  the  defence  of  State 
interests.  In  a  superficial  survey  of  the  history  of 
the  relations  between  Church  and  State,  the  mo- 
dern political  ideal  of  the  complete  equality  of 
rights  among  all  confessions,  and  of  the  school, 
considered  as  a  pure  Government  concern,  without 
the  smallest  need  of  the  Church's  intervention, 
without  the  slightest  interest  for  scholastic  dogmas, 
and  yet  disdaining  a  recourse  to  the  Placet,  and 
other  measures  of  that  kind  ;  this  modern  political 
ideal,  I  say,  is  highly  eulogized.'^  But  of  a  cor- 
responding action  of  the  State  there  is  no  ques- 
tion.    The  author  is  affrighted  by  the  Bull  "  Unam 

1^  The  Allgemeine  Zeitung,  of  the  4th  September,  gave  insertion 
to  the  opinion  of  the  majority  of  the  Theological  Faculty  of 
Munich  ;  and  on  the  19th,  it  gave  notice  of  a  criticism  passed  on 
it  by  some  disciples  of  Passaglia  in  the  kingdom  of  Italy.  On 
the  22d  of  that  month  appeared,  in  the  same  journal,  the  theolo- 
gical opinion  of  Professor  Dr  Schmidt,  only  after  it  had  been  given 
by  the  Post-Zeitung ;  and  on  the  6th  October,  as  a  supplement'taken 
from  the  latter  paper,  the  introduction  to  the  dogmatic  opinion  of 
the  majority  of  the  Munich  Faculty.  The  opinion  of  the  Würzburg 
Theological  Faculty,  the  Allgemeine  Zeitwig,  from  23d  to  30th  Sep- 
tember, copied  from  an  incorrect  extract  in  the  Post-Zeitung;  but  at 
the  same  time  it  inserted  the  correction  sent  to  the  latter  journal. 

^"  Allge?neine  Zeitung,  24th,  25th  July.     No.  205,  seq. 


The  ''Allgemeine  Zeitung y  7 

sanctam  ;'^  he  is  affrighted  by  "Rome's  lust  of 
rule,"  which,  indeed,  appears  invincible;  for  the 
past — the  ruins  of  the  city  once  the  mistress  of  the 
world — the  very  malaria  itself  seem  to  foster  the 
sense  of  greatness,  and  to  cherish  the  idea  of  uni- 
versal domination.'^  This  sentiment,  which  for 
every  other  government  would  be  deemed  excus- 
able, is  not  so  for  Papal  Rome  only.  The  clergy, 
from  the  need  of  a  livelihood,  is  cowardly  ;  nothing 
is  to  be  expected  from  its  courage.  "  On  the  laity, 
possessing  theological  culture  and  religious  senti- 
ments, devolves  the  solution  of  the  ecclesiastical 
problem  of  the  present  time."'^  Now,  with  or  with- 
out the  aid  of  the  non-Ultramontane  theologians, 
they  will  begin  the  work  of  Reformation.  But,  lo  ! 
all  hope  of  the  clergy  is  not  yet  destroyed  !  In 
old  Catholic  Münster  itself  an  agitation  has  com- 
menced against  the  CounciL^°  New  succour  to  the 
cause  is  promised  by  the  revolt  of  Pere  Hyacinthe 
(now  M.  Loyson)  "  against  the  Ultramontane 
counter-revolution  in  the  constitution,  doctrine, 
and  discipline  of  the  Catholic  Church."  "  Nay,  the 
correspondents  of  the  Allgemeine  Zeitung  have 
succeeded  in  interpreting,  in  the  sense  of  a  protest 
against  the  dangerous  manoeuvres  of  the  Roman 
Curia,  the  Address  of  the  6th  of  last  September 
made  by  the  German  bishops  assembled  at  Fulda.^'' 
Very  different  views  were  put  forth  by  the 
Catholic  Assembly  of  Düsseldorf.  They  ex- 
pressed a  sentiment  of  unqualified  submission  to 
the  decisions  of  the  Council,  from  which  nothing 
but  what  was  good  and  salutary  ought  to  be  ex- 

^^  Allgemeine  Zeitung,  5th  August.    No.  217. 

^'  Ibid.,  Letter  from  Rome,  nth  August. 

^^  Ibid.,  No.  217,  5th  August. 

2*»  Ibid.,  24th  September  (Append.)     No.  207. 

2^  Ibid.,  September  22-25.    No.  265-268. 

^  Ibid.,   i8th  September.  No.  261.— 25th  September.     No.  26S. 


8  The  Five  Articles  of 

pected.  To  the  Catholics  there  assembled  it 
seemed  a  contradiction  to  confess,  on  the  one 
hand,  the  infallibility  of  (Ecumenical  Synods,  and 
on  the  other,  to  dread  from  such  a  Council  the 
sanction  of  gross  errors.  Whosoever  deems  him- 
self called  on  to  warn  the  Council  against  such 
dangers,  evidently  entertains  but  the  slightest  pos- 
sible confidence  in  its  teaching.  While  so  many 
newspaper  readers,  who,  when  the  question  is 
about  ''  enlightened  people,"  never  wish  to  be  the 
last,  more  dazzled,  perhaps,  by  the  boldness  of 
assertion  than  by  the  brilliant  colouring  and  the 
natural  truthfulness  of  the  picture  unrolled  be- 
fore their  eyes,  have,  though  incapable  of  forming 
an  independent  judgment,  given  their  unqualified 
applause  to  the  learned  lucubrations  of  the  Augs- 
burg journal ;  and  the  less  they  held  the  Pope  to  be 
infallible,  the  more  have  they  believed  in  the  infalli- 
bility of  that  great  organ  of  the  enlightened.  Most 
classes  of  the  Catholic  population  have  preserved 
a  calm  attitude,  or  evinced  a  distrust  towards  the 
revelations  pretended  to  be  made  in  their  behalf. 
A  simple  Catholic  observed  :  "  These  publicists  are 
cunning  folks.  They  may  think :  if  what  we  have 
foretold  comes  to  pass,  then  we  have  proved  our- 
selves true  prophets  ;  but  if  our  predictions  are  not 
fulfilled,  then  it  is  we,  who,  by  a  timely  cry  of 
alarm,  have  prevented  the  passing  of  such  fatal 
decrees."  We  may  indeed  reverse  this  remark, 
and  say  to  these  publicists:  if  the  Council  does 
not  issue  the  decrees  announced  by  you  ;  then, 
cunning  as  ye  are,  you  have  been  misled  by  the 
still  more  crafty  Italians;  but  if  it  should  pronounce 
them,  then  you  have  not  been  true  prophets,  but 
the  Roman  Jesuits,  who,  wisely  or  unwisely,  have 
told  tales  out  of  school. 

Others  took  the  part  of  the  much  reviled  Jesuits, 


The  ''Allgemeine  Z eilung r  9 

who  only  received  the  blows  aimed  at  parties  oc- 
cupying a  much  more  exalted  position.  How  can 
those  Roman  Religious,  who,  in  order  to  enjoy 
greater  literary  freedom,  dwell  in  a  separate  house, 
and  hold  even  in  regard  to  their  superiors  a  privi- 
leged position,  but  are  neither  employed  as  con- 
suitors,  nor  anywise  more  than  other  publicists 
initiated  in  the  transactions  preparatory  to  the 
Council,  and  of  which,  moreover,  secrecy  is  an 
imperious  condition  ;  how  can  they  be,  I  ask,  re- 
garded as  official  or  semi-official  heralds  of  the  See 
of  Rome  ?  And  more  especially,  too,  when  the 
question  is  about  a  mere  correspondence  from 
France,  which  is  unfairly  brought  forward ;  whereas 
other  larger  essays  of  the  same  periodical  upon  the 
Council,  and  upon  the  Apostolical  Letters  having 
reference  thereto — the  only  authentic  declarations 
as  to  the  object  and  the  task  of  this  Synod — are 
passed  by  with  scarcely  any  notice  ?  How  can  the 
Papal  eulogium  of  their  labours  and  exertions  in 
general  be  construed  into  an  approval  of  every 
special  article  in  their  journal — articles  which  are 
only  the  work  of  private  individuals,  and  often  meet 
with  their  critics  in  Rome  itself;  while  the  censor- 
ship in  that  city,  represented  by  the  Master  of  the 
sacred  palace,  leaves  everything  untouched,  which 
is  not  contrary  to  faith  and  morals  ?  And  is  not 
•*  the  unctuous  tone"  of  the  periodical  to  be  referred 
rather  to  the  majority  of  its  readers,  belonging  as 
they  do  to  the  Italian  clergy,  rather  than  to  the 
character  and  the  position  of  the  writers  them- 
selves ?  And  if  the  latter  write  sometimes  incau- 
tiously and  inaccurately,  are  therefore  the  Pope  and 
the  whole  Roman  Ctiria  to  be  made  responsible 
for  these  faults  ?  This  view  again  was  enforced  by 
others. 

It  is  not  our  callinsr  nor  our  task  to  defend  the 


lo  The  Five  Articles  of 

Roman  periodical.  But  thus  much  justice  bids 
us  acknowledge,  that  very  often  the  German  press, 
entirely  overlooking  other  important  articles,  mis- 
represents its  statements,  in  order  to  stamp  on 
the  whole  journal  the  character  of  a  ridiculous 
fanaticism.  Nothing  less  than  accurate  was  the 
representation  which  a  Roman  correspondent  of 
the  Augsburg  journal  gave  of  the  reply  of  the  Ci- 
vilta  ;^^  and  a  later  reply  was  merely  characterized 
by  the  statement,^"^  that  the  Roman  journal  repre- 
sented its  opponents  as  belonging  to  a  coterie, 
whose  vital  elements  were  a  syncretism  of  Royalty 
(meaning  Regalism),  Febronianism,^^  Liberalism, 
and  Freemasonry,  and  that  it  brought  forward  some 
Scriptural  passages,  such  as  Matthew  xxviii.  19, 
Psalms  ii.  i  ;  while  the  leading  thoughts  of  the 
article  were  passed  over  in  utter  silence.  But,  on 
the  other  hand,  the  Civilfä  Cattolica  was  to  be 
blamed,  when,  on  vague  notices  or  inaccurate 
newspaper  statements,  it  brought  the  Theological 
Faculty  of  Bonn,  the  lay  addresses  of  Coblentz 
and  of  Bonn,  as  well  as  a  declaration  of  students 
in  that  University,  into  a  connexion  quite  unjusti- 
fiable. What  in  this  declaration  was  addressed 
to  the  Allgemeine  Zeitu7ig  from  the  Rhine  under 
the  title  of  "  In  defence^^ "  may,  in  despite  of  some, 
perhaps,   verbal   exaggerations,   be   deemed   well 

^^  Allgemeine  Zeitung,  13th  April.     No.  120. 

^  Ibid.,  6th  Sept.  The  article  of  the  Civilta  here  meant,  and 
which  bore  the  date  of  the  21st  August,  No.  466,  pp.  462,  466, 
468,  relating  to  the  work  entitled  "  The  General  Council  and  the 
State  of  the  World,"  we  ourselves  looked  into. 

^^  The  correspondent  of  the  Allgemeine  Zeitung  did  not  know  the 
signification  of  the  word  regalismo,  nor  what  among  the  Canonists 
is  the  school  of  regalists  :  otherwise  he  would  not  have  translated 
the  word  by  "  royalty."  His  expressions  in  the  issue  of  the  2 ist 
Oct.  show  likewise  that  he  is  not  very  familiar  with  ecclesiastical 
literature. 

2^  Allgemeine  Zeitung,  26th  Sept.  1869. 


The  ^^ Allgemeine  Zeitung^  1 1 

worthy  of  consideration.  The  exhortation  to 
prudence  and  moderation  made  in  that  article  is 
very  appropriate.  "  We  should  avoid,"  it  says, 
*'  to  express  ourselves  on  undecided  questions  with 
a  precision  and  a  warmth  which  is  in  every 
case  unsuitable,  and  may  eventually  become 
very  irksome.  We  should,  while  boasting  of 
our  knowledge,  avoid  giving  way  to  an  arro- 
gance ill  becoming  our  position  as  sons  of  the 
Church." 

In  general,  the  Catholic  press  of  Germany  has 
spoken  much  less  than  the  Protestant  on  the 
QEcumenical  Council.  It  saw,  for  the  most  part, 
that,  for  the  hypotheses  hazarded,  there  was  no 
certain  guarantee,  and  that  the  inferences  drawn 
from  them  were  yet  not  by  any  means  justified. 
After  the  example  of  French  newspapers,"*^  our 
Catholic  press  expressed  a  decided  disapproval  of 
the  Roman  periodical,  whose  expressions  have 
afforded  the  much-wished-for  occasion  for  the 
famous  Five  Articles,  which,  even  without  them, 
would  scarcely,  however,  have  been  long  held 
back.  It  disputed  the  statement  that  the  Council 
was  to  last  only  three  weeks,  and  discuss  only  the 
subjects  marked  out  in  the  Civilta  for  deliberation.^^ 
The  literature  on  the  Council  that  proceeded  from 
clerical  circles,  brought  replies  to  various  state- 
ments in  those  Articles  \'^^  but  none  so  severe  as  the 
Historisch-Politische  Blätter. ^°     In  what,  however, 

"^  For  example,  Le  Fraiicais,  i8th  March  1869. 

^  As  something  new,  the  Tmies  brought  forward,  even  later,  the 
same  three  themes  for  deliberation.  See  the  Allgemeine  Zeitung^ 
17th  Sept.  1869. 

2^  The  CEcumenical  Council  of  the  year  1869,  Periodical  papers, 
vol.  i.,  Nos.  2,  3,  Ratisbonne,  p.  89  et  seq. — The  (Ecumenical 
Council.  Voices  from  Maria  Laach,  No.  4,  Freiburg,  1869,  p. 
70,  92. 

3"  Historisch-Politische  Blätter.  Vol.  Ixiv.,  Nos.  2,  4,  especially  p. 
316,  seq. 


1 1  TJic  Five  Articles  of 

i?  there  said  respecting  the  reputed  author  of  the 
Five  Articles,  strongly  as  the  external  proofs  weigh 
in  the  balance.  I  find  it  in^ipossible,  on  internal 
grounds,  ever  to  concur.  It  must  look  like  an 
outrage  to  a  celebrated  scholar  to  ascribe  to  him 
so  shallow  a  performance,  marked  by  a  tendency 
so  ill-concealed ;  and  to  assume  that  the  views 
and  convictions  he  had  once  openly  professed, 
under  his  own  name,  he  should  now  wish  to  deny 
under  the  veil  oi  the  anonymous.  To  think  this 
seems  to  me  a  moral  impossibility  ;  and  his  silence 
in  regard  to  the  daily  press  may  be  explained  by 
the  fact,  that  he  has  deemed  it  beneath  his  dignity 
to  reply  to  such  an  accusation. 

It  was  soon  announced  that  the  renowned  Five 
Articles  would  appear  on  a  larger  scale  as  a  pam- 
phlet. At  length  ensued  the  publication  of  the 
book  now  lying  before  us  ;-''  and  this  once  more 
fu  I'll:  she  J  t'le  A!!~:>kc:}:c  Zeitung  with  an  opportu- 
i:::\-  o:'  recurring,  for  the  advantage  of  its  devout 
readers,  to  the  purport  of  the  excellent  articles.-" 
Recalling  to  mind  a  writing  that  appeared  shortly 
after  the  publication  of  the  Encyclical  of  the  Sth 
December  1S64.  the  AU^cvicinc  Zeitung  ^v^d.?>  "'the 
TCjiy':A  :•■;.;.'  cf  the  Divine  origin  of  the  Roman 
Papacy"  there  announced,  or  rather  menaced  as 
impending,  to  be  realized  in  these  articles.  And 
indeed,  continues  this  journal,  in  point  of  fulness 
and  solidity,  this  book  leaves  scarcely  anything  to 
be  desired  •  and  the  materials,  though  not  precisely 
v.-?rked  v.-;^  with  r.rtistic  skill  into  an  harmonious 

;.      L.    T.-.:  ..;.     A   r.ew  edition  of 

r  St  entitled, 

mished  with 

;   ;  f  it  into 

._  -  of  die 

J   :..    .    Append.),  3d  October.     No.  276. 


The  ''AUgC7neine  Zcittmgy  13 

whole,  give  us  clearly  to  understand  "  how  unchris- 
tian and  unjust  is  the  Papal  absolutism,  on  what  a 
hollow  basis  it  is  founded,  and  by  what  bad  means 
it  is  developed."  But  the  philosopher  who  pro- 
nounced this  eulogium,  accepts,  indeed,  these  re- 
sults of  an  historical  investigation  (in  his  opinion) 
very  solid  ;  yet  passes  a  judgment  the  more  severe 
on  the  incompleteness  and  the  inconsistency  appa- 
rent through  this  whole  work.^^ 

The  new  production  challenges,  in  a  very  de- 
cided manner,  an  examination  on  the  part  of 
Catholic  theologians  ;  and  this  it  will  scarcely  fail 
to  obtain.  Now,  in  regard  to  myself,  though  after 
long  and  fatiguing  labours,  and  after  the  comple- 
tion of  a  large  scientific  work,^"^  I  much  needed 
repose;  yet,  unhindered  by  external  considerations,^^ 
I  have  forthwith  and  quickly  entered  into  the  con- 
test— one  against  many  ;  for  we  now  learn  that  we 
have  to  deal  with  several  authors,  and  that  the 
plural  "we"  used  by  them  is  not  figurative.  I 
have  entered  upon  the  struggle  to  comply  with  a 
holy  duty,  and  to  satisfy  the  claims  of  conscience  ; 
while  supported  by  abundant  evidence,  I  protest 
against  a  theology  which  borrows  the  name  only 
of  Catholicism,  in  order  the  more  securely  to  wound 
it  in  its  vital  centre,  and  while  I  subject  to  a  free 
criticism  the  historical  and  theological  deductions 
of  the  authors  in  question.  Who  the  persons  may 
be  whom  I  have  to  contend  with,  is  to  me  a  matter 
of  indifference.     I  will  hold  merely  to  the  name  of 

'^  Allgemeine  Zeitung,  4th  October.     No.  277. 

3*  The  author's  "  Life  of  Photius." 

35  As  may  be  seen  from  the  distribution  of  the  German  Consul- 
tors  into  the  various  Committees  published  by  the  daily  papers,  I 
took  not  the  least  part  in  the  Commission  for  Dogmatic  Questions 
in  Rome  ;  and  what  I  here  write  I  would  equally  have  written  had 
I  not  been  called  to  that  city  to  have  a  share  in  the  labours  prepara- 
tory to  the  Council. 


14    A  r tides  of  the ''A  llgefneine  Zeitung^ 

Jaiuis  inscribed  on  the  title-page,  and  not  inquire 
whether  he  have  any  affinity  with  the  Janus  Quad- 
rifrons,  or  whether  he  have  only  a  twofold  or  a 
triple  front,  whether  he  have  a  double  face  or 
several  faces. 

Although  I  think  with  Janus,  that  the  attention  of 
the  reader  should  be  exclusively  concentrated  on  the 
subject-matter,  and  that  this  Reply  can  of  itself, 
and  "  without  any  connexion  with  names,"  exert  a 
due  effect  ;  yet  I  still  prefer  to  appear  openly  with 
my  name,  before  the  tribunal  of  criticism,  to  which 
I  submit  the  present  work.  In  doing  so,  I  have 
no  just  ground  for  fearing  that,  contrary  to  their 
solemn  assurance,  it  will  occur  to  the  opponents 
"  to  transfer  the  dispute  from  the  sphere  of  objective 
and  scientific  investigation  of  the  weighty  questions 
under  review,  conducted  with  dignity  and  calmness, 
into  the  alien  region  of  venomous  personal  defama- 
tion and  invective"  (P.  xxix.)  I  am  evidently  viiich 
more  exposed  to  this  danger,  than  the  anonymous 
adversaries.  I  hope  also  on  this  account  to  remain 
free  from  the  charge  of  indulging  in  imputations 
of  heresy,  and  so  forth  ;  even  though  at  times,  con- 
trary to  my  intention,  I  should  forget  a  calm  and 
measured  tone,  and  in  the  course  of  the  discussion 
drop  a  too  vivacious  expression,  which  a  competent 
judge  would  not  approve.  I  am  concerned  about 
the  cause  only,  and  not  about  persons  ;  and  the 
criticism  to  which  I  have  subjected  "  Janus,^'  I  will 
not  take  ill  of  any  scholar  if  he  should  think  fit  to 
exercise  towards  my  "  Anti-Janus."  If  in  a  work 
so  rapidly  composed  as  the  present,  an  inaccurate 
word  or  any  incorrectness  should  have  escaped 
me,  I  revoke  both  beforehand,  quite  prepared  to 
change  for  the  better  what  has  been  done  amiss/^ 

^^  I  may  here  be  permitted  to  make  use  of  the  words  of  St  Augus- 
tine :    "  Ego  fateor  me  ex  eorum  numero  esse  conari,   qui  profi- 


CHAPTER  II. 

THE    FIVE    ARTICLES    IN    THE    "  AUGSBURG 
GAZETTE,"  AND  THEIR  NEW  EDITION. 

T  is  not  uninteresting  to  compare  the  ori- 
o^xj,  ginal  with  the  later  edition,  the  Five 
^  Articles  in  the  Gazette  of  Augsburg  with 
the  book  entitled  "Janus."  What  the 
former  gave  is  mostly  to  be  found  in  the  latter  ; 
yet  the  first  production  and  its  new  form  are  by 
no  means  identical.  The  new  title  is  better  chosen ; 
for  the  question  is  not  so  much  about  the  Civiltd 
Cattolica  as  about  the  Pope  ;  as  this  is  now 
roundly  stated,  and  with  a  sort  of  proud  self- 
satisfaction.  Those  who  found  in  the  Five  Articles 
a  tone  of  mockery  and  of  wrath,  and  on  the  other 
hand  missed  logical  order,  as  well  as  calmness  and 
dignity,  will  not  pronounce  a  more  favourable  judg- 
ment on  the  revised  work  entitled  "  Janus."  Of 
the  three  principal  sections,  "  The  Syllabus  made 
Dogmatic/'  "  The  new  Dogma  about  Mary,"  and 
"  Papal  Infallibility,'^  the  last  is  immeasurably  long, 

ciendo  scribunt,  et  scribendo  proficiunt.  Unde  si  aliquid  vel 
incauiius,  vel  indoctius  a  me  positum  est,  quod  non  solum  ab  aliis, 
qui  videre  id  possunt,  merito  reprehendatur,  verum  etiam  ä  me 
ipso,  quia  et  ego  saltem  postea  videre  debeo,  si  proficio,  nee  miran- 
dum  est  nee  dolendum,  sed  potius  ignoscendum,  non  quia  erratum 
est,  sed  quia  improbatura  "  {Ep.  143,  ol.  7,  ad  Marcdlitium), 


1 6  The  Five  Articles  in 

especially  as  a  multitude  of  matters  scarcely  be- 
longing to  it  are  here  dragged  in.  Even  the  taxes 
of  the  Roman  Chancery  are  not  forgotten. 

After  a  Preface  of  nineteen  pages,  we  find  our- 
selves at  the  Introduction,  which  is  identical  with 
the  first  article  of  the  lOth  of  March.  The  first 
sentence  has  undergone  a  slight  change  in  the  new 
edition.  It  now  runs  thus  :  *'  The  veil  which  hung 
over  the  preparations  for  the  great  General  Council 
and  its  intended  doings  and  decrees  (now  has  hither- 
to hung  over  its  intentions),  begins  to  be  lifted  (now 
is  already  lifted).  The  tone  of  confidence  in  its 
statements  has  considerably  increased."  Now  fol- 
lows, as  formerly,  the  correspondence  of  the  Givilta 
Cattolica  from  France.  Before  the  paragraph  in 
the  first  article,  beginning  with  the  words,  "  So  the 
Civilta,  which  is  as  well  known  to  all,"  is  inserted 
a  longer  passage,  containing  a  like  correspondence, 
addressed  to  the  Roman  periodical  from  Belgium ; 
and  there,  our  authors  declare,  such  articles  of  cor- 
respondents are  more  than  mere  "  feelers "  in 
reference  to  the  impending  "  dogmatic  surprises." 
Now  follows  (p.  4)  what  in  substance  had  been 
said  in  the  first  article  also  upon  the  official  char- 
acter of  the  Civilta,  as  the  Moniteur  of  the  Roman 
Curia,  according  to  which  this  journal  is  charac- 
terised as  the  best  and  most  trustworthy  source 
for  all  that  is  intended  with  the  Council  in  Rome.^ 
Here  we  again  find  an  insertion,  wherein,  quite  in 
accordance  with  the  hints  elsewhere  given  by  the 
Augsburg  Gazette^  the  affirmations  of  Papal  Infal- 
libility by  recent   provincial   councils   are   repre- 

^  The  Allgemeine  Zeitung  even  asserts  that  the  numbers  of  this 
periodical  are,  prior  to  publication,  regularly  submitted  to  the 
Pope.  Whoever  is  in  any  degree  acquainted  with  the  business  and 
the  occupations  of  his  Holiness,  the  number  of  his  audiences,  and 
so  forth,  will  know  what  to  think  of  this  statement. 


The  ''Augsburg  Gazeile!*  17 

sented  as  provoked  by  Rome^  (p.  5)  ;  nay,  "the 
whole  plan  of  the  campaign "  is  unveiled,  by 
means  of  which  "  the  new  dogma,  without  long 
examination,  will  be  settled  at  one  sitting,  as  by 
the  stroke  of  a  magician's  wand"  (p.  7).  Our 
authors  ca7i  even  name  the  English  p7' elate  who  has 
undertaken  to  give  the  impulse  to  these  proceed- 
ings.^ But,  independently  of  this,  it  is  indubitably 
clear  from  the  Civilta,  "  that  the  Council  is  sum- 
moned chiefly  for  the  purpose  of  satisfying  the 
darling  wishes  of  the  Jesuits,  and  of  that  part  of 
the  Curia  which  is  led  by  them"  (p.  7).  With  the 
designation  of  these  darling  wishes,  which  are  now 


'  The  revision  of  the  Acts  of  such  Provincial  Councils  has  only 
for  object  to  prevent  decrees  against  Xh^jiis  coT?ifnuiie,  and  particu- 
larly against  the  Council  of  Trent.  A  previous  "  intimation,"  to 
express  their  opinions  on  this  or  that  point,  is  a  pure  invention. 
Father  Schneemann  has  certainly  not  wished  to  say  what  has  been 
sought  to  be  deduced  from  his  words;  nor  is  he  so  "well  in- 
formed" that  he  could  vouch  for  the  deliberations  with  all  the 
Metropolitans  in  question.  The  letters  of  a  distinguished  man  now 
no  more,  but  who  was  more  versed  in  aesthetics  than  in  theology, 
and  who,  especially  in  the  first  period  of  his  residence  in  Rome, 
gave  heedless  credit  to  much  gossip  of  the  city,  contain  more  than 
one  inaccurate  statement.  Much  he  would  himself  have  corrected, 
could  he  have  anticipated  the  later  publication  of  letters  addressed 
to  friends  ;  and  he  could  not  always  think  of  immediately  rectify- 
ing what  he  had  written  down  according  to  hearsay. 

In  this  respect  he  told  me  himself,  in  the  autumn  of  1857  : — 
*'  All  the  world  will  hear  something  new  from  Rome  ;  but  rarely 
is  one  in  a  position  to  offer  what  is  true  ;"  and  Pliny,  vi.,  Ep.  16, 
rightly  observes: — "Aliud  est  epistolam,  aliud  historiam,  aliud 
amico,  aliud  omnibus  scribere." 

iV.^.— The  person  alluded  to  is,  I  believe,  the  lamented  Dr 
Diepenbrock,  bishop  of  Breslau.     (Tr.) 

3  The  "English  prelate"  here  alluded  to  it  is  not  difficult  for 
those  to  guess  who  have  read,  in  Art.  III.  Allgemeine  Zeitung,  13th 
March,  these  words  :—"  Archbishop  Manning,  who,  with  the 
glowing  zeal  of  a  convert,  has  embraced  the  theory  of  Infallibility, 
expressed  a  short  time  ago,"  etc.  In  the  same  way  it  is  said,  in 
Art.  IV.,  under  the  date  of  14th  March  :— "  The  English  bishops 
will  follow  Manning ;  the  Irish  will  follow  Cullen,  imposed  and 
set  over  them  by  Rome." 

B 

L, 


1 8  The  Five  Articles  in 

treated  of  in  three  chapters,  the  introduction  con- 
cludes. 

The  Syllabus  made  dogmatic,  whereof  the  first 
chapter  treats,  appears  ''as  an  enriching  of  the 
Church  with  a  considerable  number  of  new  dogmas, 
but  which  (the  infallibility  of  the  Pope  once  pre- 
supposed) are  but  the  first-fruits  of  a  far  richer 
harvest  reserved  for  succeeding  times "  (p.  8).'^ 
Here  we  have  some  additions  to  the  arguments  in 
the  Allgemeine  Zeitung^  especially  a  very  signifi- 
cant reference  to  the  anti-pope  Benedict  XIII., 
residing  at  Veniscola,  who  saw  the  whole  Church  as- 
sembled only  in  his  rocky  castle.^  With  the  Jesuit 
Schrader  (p.  9)  his  fellow-religious  Schneemann  has 
been  associated  (p.  10),  after  the  brilliant  para- 
graph in  the  articles,  commencing  with  the  words, 
"  when  once  the  narrow  adherence,"  etc.,  has  been 
reserved  for  a  later  investigation.  The  paragraph 
on  the  co-active  power  of  the  Church  has  received 
considerable  extension.  The  further  deductions  in 
the  sixty-ninth  number  of  ih^  Allgemeine  Zeitung 
are  pretty  faithfully  retained  till  p.  18,*  where  No. 
70  begins.  At  p.  17,  Father  Schneemann  is  again 
cited,  and  then  Father  Schrader,  against  the 
Bishop  of  Mayence.  While  the  remainder  of  No. 
70  in  thQ  Allgemeine  Zeitung  IS  otherwise  preserved 
verbatim,  further  proofs  of  the  hatred  of  Ultra- 
montanes  against  free  institutions  are  alleged,  and, 
moreover,   the  beginning   of   the  third  article  (in 

-  Already  the  Allgemeine  Z^z'/z^«'^  (Append,),  2 ist  October  1869, 
announces,  "  Soon  will  a  new  cultus  spring  up  ;  the  adoration  (!)  of 
St  Joseph.  Various  circumstances  point  to  this  fact.  Even  English 
correspondents  frovi  Rome  speak  of  it,  as  well  as  of  the  bodily 
assumption  of  this  saint." 

^  After  the  expulsion  of  the  cultivated  classes  from  the  Church, 
the  uneducated  only  will  remain  in  it ;  but  this  true  flock  remaining 
behind,  will  the  more  pliantly  submit  to  the  "pilots  of  Loyola." 
*  According  to  the  original  (Tr). 


The  ^'Augsburg  Gazette"  19 

No.  72)  is  assigned  to  a  more  suitable  place.  The 
first  chapter  concludes  with  a  quotation  from  St 
Francis  of  Sales,  who,  we  are  told,  "  expressed  his 
dislike  for  writings  which  deal  with  political  ques- 
tions, such  as  the  indirect  power  of  the  Pope  over 
princes;  "but  he  is  no  authority  for  the  Jesuits"^ 

(P-  33)- 

In  the  following  chapter  on  the  new  Marian 
dogma,  we  receive,  with  some  changes  and  addi- 
tions, down  to  the  second  paragraph,  the  begin- 
ning of  the  second  article  in  No.  71. 

The  historical  statements  on  the  tradition,  "that 
the  body  also  of  Mary  has  been  taken  up  into 
heaven,"  are  completed  by  a  reference  to  two 
apocryphal  writings  from  the  time  between  the 
fourth  and  fifth  century,  as  well  as  to  Pseudo- 
Dionysius  and  Gregory  of  Tours.  The  Patristic 
expressions,  that  the  death  of  Mary  has  been  a 
miraculous  one,^  as  well  as  the  homilies  of  Modes- 
tus  of  Jerusalem,  Andrew  of  Crete,  Germanus  of 
Constantinople,  John  Damascene,^  who  enjoyed  in 
the  Eastern  Church  such  great  authority,  are  passed 
over  in  silence,  and  no  attention  is  paid  to  the 
arguments  of  Pope  Benedict  XIV.^  The  "glorifi- 
cation "  of  Mary  inspires  Janus  with  no  sympathy ; 
he  has  already  had  more  than  enough  in  the  doctrine 
of  the  Immaculate  Conception,  solemnly  declared  by 
Pope  Pius  IX.  to  be  part  of  divine  revelation.  Yet 
in  contrast  with  the  intended  decrees  of  the  Council 
sanctioning  the  Syllabus,  the  announced  new  Marian 
dogma  appears  very  harmless.     It  is  only  worthy 

^  Yet  the  Jesuits  willingly  quote  this  saint  for  their  side,  as,  for 
example,  Father  Schneemann,  often  mentioned  by  Janus,  in  his  work 
entitled,  "  The  Teaching  Power  of  the  Church,"  p.  125,  et  seq. 

"^  For  example,  Epiphanius,  hoer.  78,  n.  ii. 

^  Migne  PP,  gr.  t.  Ixxxvi.  p.  3277,  seq.;  t.  xcvii.  p.  IO46,  I072, 
1089,  seq. ;  t.  xcviii.  p.  340,  348,  360,  seq. 

^  Bened.  XIV.  de  fastis ;  ii.  8,  n.  i,  seq. 


20  The  Five  Articles  in 

of  notice,  that  herein,  again,  we  find  the  whole 
character  of  the  Jesuits,^"  who  are  wont  to  despise 
the  tradition  of  the  ancient  church,  and  whose 
appetite,  when  once  they  have  obtained  the  imme- 
diate object  of  their  wishes,  will  certainly  increase, 
and,  in  all  likelihood,  lead  to  a  justification  of 
the  doctrine  of  Probabilism,  and,  in  general,  of  the 
whole  moral  system  of  the  Order,  "that  ever-gaping 
wound  in  its  reputation"  (p.  36)."  Yet  we  wish  not 
to  dwell  any  longer  on  this  subject. 

The  long  section,  entitled,  "  Papal  Infallibility," 
which,  moreover,  contains  many  other  things,  be- 
gins (p.  37)  with  a  citation  from  Gretser  and  Caje- 
tan  (the  words  of  the  latter  are  repeated  at  p.  375), 
**  who  express  the  fundamental  principle  of  the 
Ultramontane  doctrine,  that  when  we  speak  of  the 
Church,  its  rights,  and  its  action,  we  always  mean 
the  Pope,  and  the  Pope  ouly!'  The  Civilta  Catto- 
lica,  it  is  said,  sets  forth  the  same  view.  We  get 
the  conclusion  of  the  first  of  the  Five  Articles, 
with  some  additions  respecting  these  Ultramon- 
tane views  upon  the  circumstances  of  Italy,^^  and 
the  rest,  in  which  the  Mortara  case,  long  since 
appreciated  by  Canonists,'^  is  not  forgotten  (p.  42). 

^^  Upon  this  theme  we  find  scarcely  any  writings  of  the  Jesuits  in 
modern  times.  Among  Italian  writers,  we  may  mention  the  trea- 
tise of  the  Benedictine  Aloysius  Vaccari  (de  Corporeä  Deiparse  in 
Coelum  assumptione) ;  that  of  the  Franciscan  Observantine,  Luigi 
Buselli  (La  Vergine  Maria  vivente  in  corpo  ed  in  anima  in  cielo) ; 
and  that  of  Padre  Caspare  de  Luise,  of  the  order  of  the  Pii  Operarii 
(L'Assunzione  di  Maria), 

^^  Of  the  numerous  apologies  which,  even  down  to  our  times, 
have  never  yet  received  a  scientific  refutation,  such  as  those  of  Riffel, 
Moufang,  Magnus  Jocham,  and  the  Baron  von  Ketteler,  bishop  of 
Mayence  ("Attacks  against  Gurey's  Theology,"  Mayence,  1 869), 
Janus  naturally  takes  not  the  slightest  notice. 

^■^  What  Janus  here  (pp.  37-42)  alleges,  shows  strong  prejudices, 
indeed,  but  no  knowledge  of  the  real  facts.  We  shall,  however,  not 
pause  to  dwell  on  secondary  matters. 

i=*  Cf.  Katholik,  1859,  vol.  i.,  p.  64,  seq.  "Archiv,  for  Catholic 
Can.  Law,"  vol.  iv.,  Nos.  5,  6.     (In  German.) 


The  '' Atigsbtn^g  Gazetted  21 

As  great  spirits  ever  coincide,  so  in  respect  "  to 
the  Roman  lust  of  dominion,  to  which  all  the  ori- 
ginality and  the  self-efforts  of  the  German  mind 
are  to  be  sacrificed  ;"  Janus  here,  as  in  many  other 
things,  concurs  with  a  Catholic  philosopher,  who 
has  long  since  given  up  all  Romanism.''^  "  The 
whole  Ultramontane  habit  of  mind,  Janus  teaches 
us,  is  rooted  in  the  personal  infallibility  of  the 
Pope."  Here  the  passage  taken  from  the  Intro- 
duction to  the  first  Article,  and  which,  in  the  new 
edition,  had  been  left  out  in  that  place,  is  brought 
in — the  passage  inculcating  the  precious  doctrine, 
that  with  the  triumph  of  these  views  *'  a  new  prin- 
ciple of  immeasurable  importance,  both  retrospec- 
tive and  prospective,  will  be  established — a  prin- 
ciple which,  when  once  irrevocably  fixed,  will  ex- 
tend its  dominion  over  men's  minds  more  and 
more,  till  it  has  coerced  them  into  subjection  to 
every  Papal  pronouncement  in  matters  of  religion, 
morals,  politics,  and  social  science.  For  it  will  be 
idle  to  talk  any  more  of  the  Pope's  encroaching 
on  a  foreign  domain  ;  he,  and  he  alone,  as  being 
infallible,  will  have  the  right  of  determining  the 
limits  of  his  teaching  and  action  at  Ins  ozvn  good 
pleasure,  and  every  such  determination  will  bear 
the  stamp  of  infallibility"  (p.  45-6). 

In  the  same  words  as  in  the  Articles,  only  with 
some  changes,  the  terrific  consequences  of  the 
dogma  of  Infallibility  are  depicted,  to  which  the 

^4  T.  Frohschammer.  **  The  Right  of  Private  Conviction,"  Leip- 
sic,  1869,  pp.  229,  230.  Upon  the  levying  of  taxes  compare  this 
work,  p.  216,  with  what  Janus  says,  pp.  195,  236,  seq.  (Lasalle,  as 
is  well  known,  has  far  better  appreciated  the  relations  of  the  Middle 
Age,  so  different  from  those  of  modern  times.)  Upon  the  oppo- 
sition to  all  science,  Cf.  Frohschammer,  p.  220,  with  Janus,  p.  17, 
seq.  280,  and  alibi ;  upon  the  Inquisition  and  intolerance,  Froh- 
schammer, p.  9-1 1,  with  Janus,  pp.  14-18,  ^^^-^  and  pp.  254,  seq.  The 
paging  is  here  according  to  the  German  edition  of  "Janus.")  [Mr 
Frohs'chammer  is  a  suspended  priest.]     (Tr.) 


2  2  The  Five  Articles  in 

sequel  of  Article  II.,  in  No.  71  of  the  Allgemeine 
Zeitung,  entitled,  ''  Papal  Infallibility  defined  by 
the  Council  as  an  Article  of  Faith,"  is  suitably 
annexed.  The  witticism  about  Theology  assuming 
more  and  more  a  "Talmudic"  character  finds  its 
place  here  also. 

What  next  the  second  Article  upon  "  Papal 
Errors  and  Contradictions,"  as  well  as  the  third 
Article  upon  the  genesis  ofthe  theory  of  Infallibility, 
and  of  the  forgeries  made  in  its  behalf,  had  but 
briefly  indicated,  has  now  been  spun  out  into  a 
long  treatise.  Thenceforward  between  the  ori- 
ginal and  the  newly-edited  text  a  radical  differ- 
ence prevails,  and  very  little  is  found  in  accord. 
A  frightful  picture  of  the  mediaeval  Papacy,  and 
of  the  circumstances  it  brought  about,  is  sketched 
for  us.  The  system  of  legates,  and  the  bestowal 
of  the  Pallium,  appeals,  exemptions,  and  dispensa- 
tions, reservations,  and  the  oath  of  obedience,  the 
Inquisition  and  trials  for  witchcraft,  in  short,  all 
possible  terrors,  are  brought  before  us  in  motley 
array ;  while  again,  from  the  fourth  and  fifth 
Articles,  various  episodes  belonging  to  the  last 
four  centuries  are  introduced  in  a  somewhat  modi- 
fied form. 

We  were  promised  a  new  edition  of  the  articles 
in  the  Allgemeine  Zeitung,  provided  with  proofs 
from  original  sources.  But  precisely  in  those  pas- 
sages, where  such  authoritative  proofs  were  most 
needed,  these  are  not  furnished  ;^^  while  such  are 
found  in  other  places,  where  they  were  scarcely 
necessary.  Several  statements  and  assertions  in 
the  Articles,  which  we  had  wished   to   see  fully 

15  For  example,  for  the  proposition  p.  l8l  in  German :  "  So  often  as 
the  Pope  passed  a  new  law,  the  Curia  calculated  what  would  be  its 
profits  arising  from  the  dispensations  now  rendered  necessary,"  &c. 
The  proofs  for  this  ioties-quoties  it  would  not  be  so  easy  to  adduce. 


The ''Augsburg  Gazette!'  23 

proved,  have  now  been  entirely  left  out.     To  this 
belong,  for  example,  the  following  passages  : — 

1.  At  the  conclusion  of  the  second  article,  it  was 
asserted  that  Pope  Paul  V.  had  sacrificed  to  his 
claims  of  political  power  even  the  hope  of  the 
reunion  of  England  with  Rome  held  out  to  him 
by  King  James  the  First ;  and  for  this  assertion  re- 
ference was  made  to  a  diplomatic  document,  dated 
the  22nd  July  1609,  and  to  be  found  in  the  Im- 
perial Library  at  Paris/^  This  statement  appeared 
even  to  the  editors  of  the  Allgemeine  Zeitung  im.- 
probable  ;  it  was,  therefore,  the  more  necessary  to 
publish  the  document.  That  this  did  not  take 
place,  but  that  the  statement  was  entirely  omitted 
in  the  new  edition,  cannot  have  for  a  reason  that 
it  was  not  wished  to  give  any  support  to  the  con- 
jecture expressed  by  a  Catholic  publicist/^  as  to  the 
authorship  of  the  articles. 

2.  In  the  third  Article  that  appeared  in  No.  72 
of  the  Allgemeine  Zeitung,  a  declaration  was  as- 
cribed to  Pope  Alexander  III.,  to  wit,  that  adultery 
committed  by  a  priest  is  a  lesser  sin,  for  which  he 
was  not  to  incur  deprivation,  nay,  not  even  suspen- 
sion by  his  bishop.  It  was  not  subjoined  where 
Alexander  had  said  this.  Some  thought  of  Canon 
iv.  At  si  clerici^  in  the  Decretal,  entitled  De 
Judiciis(ii.  i)  ;  but  from  this  passage  that  asser- 
tion is  not  to  be  proved.'^  Others  thought  of  the 
Decretal  "  Significasti,"  where,  however,  the  ques- 
tion is  about  an  accused,  and  not  yet  convicted 
priest,  to  whom  the  Pope  prescribes  canonical 
purgation  in  such  a  way,  that  in  case  he  did  not 

10  The  treasures  of  the  Vatican,  the  friends  of  Janus  could  also 
make  use  of,  p.  382  (in  German). 

I''  This  is  M.  Jörg,  the  editor  of  the  great  bi-monthly  periodical 
entitled  the  Historisch- Politische  Blatter,  Munich.     (Tr.) 

^8  Augsburg  Ecclesiastical  Journal^  No.  20,  of  the  15th  May  1869.. 


24  The  Five  Articles  in 

clear  his  character,  he  should  be  suspended/^  Here 
was  Alexander  III.  grossly  calumniated.  Now 
that  passage  is  entirely  left  out  in  "  Janus/'  without 
any  restitution  of  his  good  name  being  made  to  the 
calumniated  Pope. 

3.  In  the  fifth  Article  it  was  said,  "That  in 
order  to  silence  the  German  Church  at  the  Coun- 
cil of  Trent,  Paul  III.  had,  by  a  special  Brief, 
contrary  to  the  usage  of  former  synods,  enjoined 
that  no  right  of  voting  should  be  granted  to  its 
deputies."  To  this  it  was  replied  :^°  "  The  reverse 
is  true.  Paul  III.  had  issued  a  Brief,  quo  episcopis 
GermanicB  indulgebatur  uses  sujfragii  per  Procura- 
tores  ;  and  in  this  the  Germans  were  even  favoured 
before  other  nations,  so  that  the  legates,  from  fear 
of  exciting  jealousy,  kept  back  the  Brief."  ^^  Now 
this  passage  also  fails  in  "  Janus,"  although  the 
general  accusation  of  the  ill-treatment  of  the  Ger- 
mans by  Rome  has  been  faithfully  retained.^^ 

4.  The  statements  about  Count  De  Maistre  and 
the  Abbe  de  la  Mennais,  which  were  to  be  read  in 
the  fourth  Article,  are  now  omitted.  Perhaps  the 
explanation  of  the  catastrophe  of  the  latter  writer 
by  the  "  dogma  of  Infallibility,"  appeared  too  one- 
sided and  too  rash. 

5.  The  reference  also  to  the  Declaration  of  1682, 
and  the  refutation  of  the  hypothesis  of  Infallibility 
by  Cardinal  La  Luzerne,  which  adorned  the  same 

^^  Bamberg  Ecclesiastical  Gazette,  No.  23  of  the  5  th  June,  upon  c.  5. 
de  adult,  v.  16,  Cf.  Farinac.  Prax.  crim.  p.  v.  qu,  40.  Reiffenstuel 
inh.  1.  §§  I.  n.  14. 

2«  Ibid.,  loc.  cit. 

21  Pallavicini  Hist.  Cone.  Trid.  L.  vi.  c.  2.  n.  6,  7. 

22  Pp.  232,  seq.,  313,  315,  323,  329,  351,  359,  360,  366  (in  the 
original).  With  these  passages  we  may  compare  the  work  en- 
titled "  Imperatorum,  Imperiique,  principum  ac  procerum  totius- 
que  nationis  Germanise  Gravamina  adversus  Sedem  Romanam 
totumque  ecclesiasticum  ordinem  eruta  ex  actis  a  Jac.  Frid.  Georgii. 
Francoforti  et  Lipsise.     1725. 


The  ''Augsburg  Gazette!'  25 

article,  have  not  been  reproduced.  Was  it  because 
the  work  of  Mgr.  Maret,  which  is  shortly  to  ap- 
pear in  Germany  also,  furnishes  a  substitute  ?  ""^  Or 
was  it  because  new  historical  researches  have  placed 
the  origin  of  that  Declaration  in  a  less  favourable 
light  ?  ^' 

6.  Even  the  quotation  from  a  work  of  the 
Oratorian  Laderchi,  which  appeared  in  the  fourth 
Article,  has  here  been  omitted.  Is  this  because 
the  fact  is  not  correctly  alleged,  or  because  the 
work  sharply  attacks  certain  critics,^^  who  without 
any  moderation,  without  any  respect  for  the  Church 
and  for  her  doctrines,  strive  after  the  morbid  fashion 
of  Rationalists,  to  drag  everything  into  the  dust ; 
men  whom  we  may  call  hyper-critics  or  pseudo- 
critics  t 

7.  That  the  conclusion  of  the  five  Articles, 
which  characterizes  the  impending  QEcumenical 
Council,  as  a  "  Synod  of  flatterers,  like  the  Latro- 
cinium  of  Ephesus,"  has  been  omitted  in  the  new 
edition,  we  would  fain  regard  as  a  sign  of  improve- 
ment, and  of  a  return  to  greater  moderation. 

I  should  be  obliged  to  write  a  book  three  times 
as  thick  as  that  of  "  Janus,"  were  I  to  submit  all  its 
particular  statements,  more  especially  in  the  second 
half  of  the  work,  to  a  critical  survey.  For,  in 
general,  accusation  requires  less  space  than  de- 
fence ;  and  in  historical  controversies  it  is  neces- 
sary, on  one  hand,  to  reduce  to  their  true  value  the 
testimonies   cited   by    the   opponent,  and  on  the 

23  Le  Concile  Generale  et  la  paix  religieuse,  Paris,  2  vols.,  adver- 
tised in  the  Allgemeine  Zeitung  of  20th  September  1869. 

2^  Charles  Gerin.  Recherches  Historiques  sur  I'Assemblee  de 
1682.     Paris,  1869. 

"^  La  critica  d'oggidi  ossia  Vabtcso  della  critica  odiema  di  Gia- 
como  Laderchi,  Rome  1726,  pp.  81,  88.  100.  [The  criticism  of  the 
present  day,  or  the  abuse  of  criticism  in  the  present  time.  By  J. 
Laderchi.] 


26     Articles  in  the  ''A  tegs  burg  Gazetted 

other  hand,  accurately  to  bring  forward  the  oppo- 
site authorities,  which  have  been  passed  over, 
whether  from  design  or  from  ignorance.  Moreover, 
the  attacks  are  systematically  directed  on  certain 
special  isolated  points,  severed  from  their  general 
connexion  ;  so  that,  in  defence,  we  must  constantly 
point  to  this  historical  connexion — a  connexion 
which  is  not  immediately  and  fully  apparent  to 
every  reader  of  the  work  in  question.  Hence,  in- 
dependently of  other  labours  incumbent  upon  me,  I 
must  confine  myself  within  certain  limits  ;  appre- 
ciating some  of  the  most  important  points  more 
fully,  others  more  briefly,  leaving  the  rest  to  the 
work  of  other  men.  On  this  occasion,  I  think  I 
am  justified  in  expressing  a  wish,  that  the  clergy, 
especially  in  the  face  of  an  historical  school,  which, 
though  in  many  ways  one-sided,  is  still  intellectual, 
and  seizes  on  ecclesiastical  questions  with  the 
greatest  eagerness  ;  that  the  clergy,  I  say,  should 
take  up  many  labours  formerly  neglected,  and 
which  exceed  the  powers  of  individuals  ;  and,  in 
general,  devote  greater  attention  to  the  pursuit  of 
historical  studies.  If  it  is  a  misfortune  that  so 
many  historians  should  be  destitute  of  a  know- 
ledge of  dogmatic  theology  and  Canon  Law,  it 
is  a  misfortune  also,  that  so  many  divines  per- 
.fectly  familiar  with  dogmatic  questions,  are  not 
historians  withal. 


CHAPTER  III. 

MAKING   THE  SYLLABUS  DOGMATIC. 


N  appalling  thought,  whose  whole  signifi- 
cance the  reader  can  scarcely  realize  \ 
*'  To  speak  seriously,  the  contest  inaugu- 
rated by  the  Encychcal  of  1864,  will  have 
to  be  carried  out  with  the  free  use  of  every 
available  Church  weapon, — a  contest  against  the 
common  sentiment  and  moral  sense  of  every 
civilized  people,  and  against  all  the  institutions 
that  have  grown  out  of  them"  (p.  18).  That 
is  to  say,  the  eighty  propositions  condemned  in 
the  Syllabus  appended  to  the  Encyclical  of  the 
8th  December  1864,  are  to  be  defined  in  the  form 
of  positive  enunciations  and  affirmative  theses  ;  or, 
in  other  words,  the  propositions,  contrary  to  those 
proscribed  assertions,  will  receive  the  stamp^  of 
articles  of  faith.  As  now,  according  to  the  view 
of  Janus,  those  condemned  theses  are  the  expression 
"of  the  common  sentiment  and  moral  sense  of 
every  civiHzed  people,  and  of  all  the  institutions 
that  have  grown  out  of  them,"  and  which  the 
Jesuits,  the  intellectual  authors  of  the  Encyclical 
and  the  Syllabus  ^  combat  to  the   utmost  extre- 

1  Here  Janus  (p.  23)  perfectly  coincides  with  the  writing,  entitled, 
*'  Illustration  of  the  Papal  Encyclical."     Leipzic,  1865. 


28         Making  the  Syllabus  Dogmatic, 

mity ;  so  new  articles  of  faith  are  to  be  created, 
thoroughly  reprehensible,  and  in  the  highest  degree 
irrational  and  absurd,  calculated  to  revolt  every 
Christian  soul. 

Were  the  hypotheses  here  made,  well-founded,  so 
the  devoutest  Catholic  might  fear  he  must  incur 
the  danger  of  being  misled  by  his  Church.  But 
that  they  are  happily  unfounded,  is  a  matter  easy 
to  be  proved. 

In  the  first  place,  it  is  a  false  hypothesis  to  as- 
sert that  propositions,  contrary  to  all  the  theses 
condemned  in  the  Syllabus,  can  ever  become  real 
articles  of  faith.  These  theses  are  designated  in 
globo  as  errors,  but  by  no  means  as  heretical  pro- 
positions. Among  them  are  such,  as  in  a  special 
qualification  would  be  characterised  only  as  false, 
temerarious,  and  so  forth  ;  ^  a  distinction  that  was 
made,  for  instance,  in  the  Thirty-nine  Articles 
drawn  up  by  Pope  Martin  V.,  in  respect  of  the 
errors  of  Wyclift"e  and  Huss.^  The  twelfth  article 
of  the  Syllabus,  namely,  "  The  Decrees  of  the 
Apostolic  See  and  of  the  Roman  Congregations 
impede  the  Free  Progress  of  Science,"  may  well  be 
censured  as  false,  rash,  scandalous,  offensive  to  the 
Holy  See,  and  to  the  whole  Church,  but  not  as 
heretical  ;  for  it  runs  not  directly  against  revela- 
tion, or  against  truths  defined  by  the  Church.  It 
is  only  the  contrary  of  a  propositio  hcereticay  that 
can  be  regarded  as  a  dogma.  But  of  all  this  Janus 
seems  never  to  have  heard. 

Secondly,  it  is  an  assumption  theologically  inad- 
missible, to  make  the  views  of  the  modern  world 
the  touchstone  of  Christian  truths,  and  to  substi- 
tute for  the  rule  of  faith,  and  of  the  ecclesiastical 
magisterium,  "  the  common  sentiment  and  moral 

2  Denzinger  Enchiridion,  ed.  iv.  Praef.  p.  ix. 

3  Denzinger loc.  cit.p.  194.  n.  555,  Interrog.  il. 


Making  the  Syllabus  Dogmatic.         29 

sense  of  civilized  nations."  Every  one,  Protestant 
as  well  as  Catholic,  knows  full  well  how  widely  the 
modern  views  of  the  world  have  departed  from  the 
standard  of  Christianity,  and  how  many  anti-Chris- 
tian elements  they  take  in.'^  Though  these  prin- 
ciples may  contain  much  that  is  true  and  right, 
still  it  will  be  necessary  to  separate  these  elements 
from  what  is  false  and  unjust,  neither  blindly  to 
condemn  everything  modern,  nor  unrighteously  to 
glorify  it.  But  never  can  these  principles  in  their 
totality  be  made  the  criterion  and  the  touchstone 
of  Christian  truths  ;  but,  on  the  contrary,  it  is  by 
the  Christian  standard  they  must  be  measured  and 
judged,  so  far  at  least  as  religion  (and  this  is  the 
highest  object  of  concern  to  the  believer)  is  at 
stake.  Woe,  indeed,  to  Christianity,  if  it  must 
fashion  itself  according  to  the  modern  civihzed 
state  ;  if  it  is  to  be  tested  sometimes  by  the  maxims 
of  1789,  sometimes  by  those  of  1793. 

A  third  false  assumption  is,  that  the  Syllabus, 
solemnly  accepted  as  it  has  been  by  the  Episco- 
pate, contains  the  monstrosities  which  certain  par- 
ties wish  to  find  therein,  and  which  have  thrown 
many,  who  live  in  a  state  of  intellectual  dependence 
on  the  daily  press,  into  the  utmost  anguish.  Many 
of  the  Catholic  laity,  indeed,  wished  for  a  more 
detailed  and  practical  explanation  of  that  docu- 
ment, which  they  saw  so  often  misunderstood  and 
misinterpreted,^  more  especially  as  but  few  persons 

*  This  is  evinced  by  the  complaints  as  to  the  hostile  attitude  of 
the  world  towards  faith,  by  the  unchristian  desecration  which  the 
State  is  rapidly  tending  to,  by  a  legislation  that  utterly  ignores  re- 
ligion, by  the  predominant  materialistic  tendency  of  the  age,  and  so 
forth  ;  complaints  which  we  hear  at  every  comer,  and  indeed  not 
only  in  sermons,  but  in  treatises,  in  pamphlets,  and  in  newspapers. 

^  On  the  part  of  Protestants,  like  Guizot  in  his  "Meditations 
sur  I'etat  actuel  de  la  Religion"  (Paris,  1866),  this  can  be  more 
easily  understood. 


;3o         Making  tJie  Syllabus  Dogmatic. 

gave  themselves  the  trouble  of  recurring  to  the 
Apostolic  Letters  and  Allocutions,  from  which  its 
several  propositions  are  taken.  To  interpret  the 
latter  by  the  former  is,  according  to  all  the  laws 
of  interpretation,  not  only  admissible,  but  impera- 
tive. The  civilisation,  the  progress,  with  which  the 
Pope  cannot  be  reconciled  and  cannot  ally  himself 
(Syllab.  n.  80  ;  compare  "J^-nus,"  p.  20),  is  (as  is  evi- 
dently borne  out  by  the  context  of  the  Allocution 
of  1 8th  March  1861  here  cited),  nought  else  but 
that  reprehensible  system  which  under  the  mask 
of  civilisation  and  progress,  assails  and  strives  to 
root  out  the  Church,  as  has  been  evinced  in  so 
shocking  a  way  in  Italy,  and  which  is  not  the  true, 
but  the  false  civilisation,  meriting  rather  the  name 
of  barbarism.^ 

Janus,  indeed,  is  of  a  different  opinion.  But  who 
has  said,  and  who  has  proved,  that  it  is  the  inten- 
tion of  the  Syllabus,  "  to  exalt  principles  at  first 
only  applied  to  the  condition  and  circumstances 
of  a  particular  country  into  universal  articles  of 
faith  !"  and  this  without  any  regard  to  existing 
relations,  and  well-founded  historical  rights  .-*  Who 
has  said  or  proved,  that  according  to  these  propo- 
sitions, all  established  laws  and  constitutions  must 
be  changed,  and  all  bishops  be  bound  to  labour 
for  their  overthrow  (''Janus,"  p.  29).  Right  prin- 
ciples are,  indeed,  everywhere  the  same  ;  but  prin- 
ciples and  their  practical  realization  are  to  be 
carefully  discriminated.  Here  we  meet  with  a 
fourth  false  assumption  of  Janus. 

For  the  Church  must,  from  her  dogmatic  point  of 
view,  reject  011  principle  many  things,  which  in  life 
she  cannot  and  will  not  abolish  ;  and  this  on  the 
ground  that  this  seems  the  lesser  evil.     By  her  the 

«  Bishop  Ketteler,  "  Germany  after  the  War  of  1866  "  (in  Ger- 
man), p.  142. 


Maki7ig  the  Syllabus  Dogmatic.        3 1 

unity  of  faith  in  a  purely  Catholic  country  is  esti- 
mated as  a  supreme  blessing-/  and  with  perfect 
justice.  But  thence  it  only  follows  that  this  unity, 
where  it  exists,  should  be  protected  ;  but  by  no 
means,  that  in  those  countries  where,  by  the  power 
of  circumstances,  it  has  succumbed,  it  should  be 
re-established  without  any  regard  to  the  conse- 
quences thence  ensuing,  or  to  the  rights  of  non- 
Catholics  —  a  course  of  proceeding  which  the 
strictest  theologians  have  never  advocated.^  The 
Church  changes  not  her  maxims,  as  ladies  of 
fashion  change  their  dress,  or  modern  scholars 
their  views  ;  what  she  once  held  true,  is  still  true 
for  her  to-day.  The  world  may  change,  but  she 
remains  steadfast  to  her  principles ;  and  to  those 
principles  the  laws  of  universal  morality  pre- 
eminently belong.  When  Gregory  XVI.  issued 
the  Encyclical  of  the  15th  August  1832,  scarcely 
a  voice  was  lifted  up  against  it ;  but  when  Pius 
IX.  more  precisely  inculcated  the  maxims  of  his 
predecessor,  what  a  loud  storm  rose  up  against 
him  !  And  as  to  the  so  much  detested  co-active 
power,  is  it  only  since  yesterday,  since  1864,  the 
Church  has  attributed  it  to  herself.?  Has  she 
not  from  all  times  asserted  it  t  ^  But  the  mode  of 
application  was  and  is  different ;  spiritual  penalties 
were  and  are  the  ordinary  ones,  the  temporal  being 
much  more  rare. 

If  among  the  temporal  punishments  mentioned 
by  the  Jesuit  Schneemann,  Janus  (p.  10.)  lays  a 

''  Compare  Bollinger,  "The  Church  and  Churches,"  p.  88,  in  Ger- 
man.   Walter's  Canon  Law,  §§  56.  xi.  ed.  in  German. 

8  Cf.  Martin  Beccan.  Duell,  de  primat.  reg.  L.  iii.  c.  8.  n,  14  de 
fide  hsereticis  servanda.  L.  ii.  c.  10.    Maldonat,  '"n  Matth.  c.  13. 

^  Viiü  the  Capuchin  Jeremiah  a  Benettis  Privileg.  S.  Petri 
Rom.  Pontifici  collatonim  Vindicise.  p.  ii.  torn.  vi.  Romse  1761, 
art.  6.  p.  550.  De  potestate  coactiva.  Vu/e  Wurzb.  Kath.  Wochen- 
schrift 1854,  No.  49  and  50. 


32         Making  the  Syllabus  Dogmatic. 

stress  upon  whippings  ;  so  he  may  rest  assured 
that  at  the  present  day  no  bishop  any  longer  in- 
flicts them,  though  he  may  beheve  that  formerly, 
not  without  justice,  were  such  penalties  adjudged 
by  bishops  and  synods  against  offenders,  and  the 
same  holds  good  of  banishment,""  imprisonment, 
and  pecuniary  fines."  The  Church  doth  not  07i 
principle  renounce  rights  which  she  has  once  ex- 
ercised, and  whose  exercise  under  certain  circum- 
stances (and  were  it  only  in  Africa),  might  in  a 
relative  manner  become  again  necessary.  Thence 
to  infer  the  design  of  the  Church  to  overthrow 
all  institutions  of  State  is  in  nowise  admissible. 
A  manifold  fallacy  is  it,  when  (p.  13.)  from  the 
23d  proposition  of  the  Syllabus  in  an  affirmative 
form,  to  wit,  "  Popes  have  never  exceeded  the 
bounds  of  their  power,  or  usurped  rights  of 
princes,"  the  following  inference  is  drawn  : — 
*' Accordingly,  all  Catholics  must  for  the  future 
acknowledge,  and  all  teachers  of  constitutional  law 
(staat's-recht),  {sic),  and  of  theology,  must  main- 
tain, that  the  Popes  can  still  depose  kings  at  their 
will,  and  give  away  whole  kingdoms  and  nations 
at  their  good  pleasure.  For  the  proposition  taken 
in  itself  speaks  of  the  past  only,  and  not  of  the 
present  or  of  the  future  ;  and  to  render  possible,  on 

^^  Aug.  ep.  133,  n.  2,  ad  Marcellin.  tribun.  0pp.  ii.  396.  Venet. 
1729.  Tantorum  scelerum  confessionem  .  .  .  virgamm  ver- 
beribus  eniisti,  qui  modus  coercitionis  et  a  niagistris  liberalium 
artium,  et  ab  ipsis  parentibus  et  ssepe  etiam  hi  jiidiciis,  solet  ab 
episcopis  adhiberi.  Cyprian  in  vita  S.  Csesarii  Arelat.  Surius 
27  Aug.  t.  iv.  p.  927.  Colon.  Agrip.  1583. — S.  Greg.  M.  L.  18 
ep.  27.  ad  Januar.  L.  ix.  ep.  65  ad  eundem.  L.  xi.  ep.  71  ad  Anth. 
Opp.  II.  707,  782,  1177,  ed.  Paris,  1706.  Cassian.  Instit.  iv.  16. 
Pallad.  Hist.  Laus,  c.  6.  Cone.  Agath.,  506,  c.  38,  41.  Matiscon, 
i.   581,   c.  8.     Narbon,  589,  c.  13.     (Hefele  Concil,  ii.  638.,  iii. 

33.  50,  5I-) 

^^  Concil.  Aurel  iv.  anno  541,  c.  29.  Tolet.  xii.  681,  c.  il. 
(Hefele  Cone.  11.  760.  iii.  289.)  Greg.  M.  L.  xi.  ep.  71.  c.  23,  et 
63,  c.  9,  c.  III.  9,  4,  c.  3.  c.  ead.  qu.  5. 


Making  tJu  Syllabus  Dogmatic.         33 

application  to  the  latter,  legal  relations  of  a  per- 
fectly like  kind  must  be  presupposed.  Further, 
it  must  be  proved,  that  the  pontifical  acts  referred 
to  were  performed  purely  according  to  good  plea- 
sure^ without  any  title  in  law  ;  whereas  many  legal 
titles  might  be  cited,  as,  for  example,  from  the 
feudal  law,  in  reference  to  vassal  kingdoms  ;  and, 
as  must  be  clear  to  every  unprejudiced  person,  the 
Popes,  in  the  Middle  Ages,  could  enforce,  with  full 
justice,  many  claims  which  are  now  no  longer  equally 
valid.  On  the  other  hand,  the  strictest  theologians 
of  the  Ctiria^^  have  contested  the  principle  that 
Popes  could  depose  kings  according  to  their  good 
pleasure;  and  besides,  they  by  no  means  intended 
to  justify  every  act  of  every  Pope. 

In  general,  the  kind  and  mode  of  reasoning  pur- 
sued by  our  Janus,  is,  to  use  the  mildest  word, 
something  more  than  astonishing.  He  brings  be- 
fore us  the  Bishop  of  Mayence,  as  corrected  by  the 
Jesuits,  (p.  19),  and  subjoins  to  this  fact  a  pathetic 
declaration  *'  on  the  unworthy  mental  slavery  the 
Roman  Jesuit  party  threatens  German  *  Catholics 
with  !  "  The  state  of  the  case  is  this  :  A  proposi- 
tion, from  a  former  writing  by  the  celebrated  pre- 
late, ^^was,  in  a  Viennese  publication,  prefaced,  and, 
indeed,  composed  (?)  by  Father  Schrader,  desig- 
nated as  one  that  since  the  EncycHcal  could  not 
bear  repetition  ;  ^^  whereupon  followed  a  more  ac- 

'2  Bianchi,  Delia  Potesti  et  della  poUzia  della  Chiesa.  Roma 
1745.  t.  I.  L.  I.  §  8.  n.  I  ;  p.  78.  §  5.  n.  l  seq.  ;  p.  40.  seq.  : 
§  14.  p.  116  seq.;  §  15,  p.  122  seq.;  §  21.  n.  5.  p.  187,  seq.; 
L.  II.  §  II,  p.  322. 

1^  Freiheit,  Autorität,  und  Kirche.  Mainz,  1S62,  p-  155, 
[Freedom,  Authority,  and  Church.] 

^^  Der  Papst  und  die  modernen  Ideen.  Wien,  1865.  11  Heft, 
p.  33.   [The  Pope  and  Modem  Ideas.] 

*  Dr  Hergenröther,  in  the  quotation,  writes  "  German  Catholics-" 
The  English  translator  of  "Janus  "  hzs foreign  Catholics  (Tr.) 

C 


34        Makmg  the  Syllabus  Dogmatic. 

curate  explanation  on  the  part  of  the  episcopal 
author.'^  That  passage  of  the  bishop's  ran  as  fol- 
lows :  "  There  is  no  established  maxim  of  the 
Church,  that  should  prevent  a  Catholic  from  hold- 
ing "  that,  tmder  certain  given  relations,^^  the  civil 
power  would  do  best  to  grant  full  religious  free- 
dom, with  the  limitation  that  the  personality  of 
God  should  not  be  denied,  nor  morality  endan- 
gered." So  runs  the  passage  in  question.  But 
something  very  different  is  given  by  Janus.  He 
makes  the  bishop  insist,  '*  that  the  Church  so 
thoroughly  respects  freedom  of  conscience  as  to 
repudiate  all  outward  coercion  of  those  beyond  her 
pale  as  immoral  and  utterly  unlawful ;  that  nothing 
is  further  from  her  mind  than  to  employ  any  phy- 
sical force  against  those  who,  as  being  baptized, 
are  her  members ;  that  she  must  leave  it  entirely 
to  their  own  freest  determination  whether  they 
will  accept  her  faith ;  and  that  it  is  absurd  for 
Protestants  to  suppose  they  have  any  need  to  fear 
a  forcible  conversion,  &c.,  &c."  (p.  i8).  These  are 
not  the  propositions  on  which  the  bishop  "  has 
been  instructed  by  the  Syllabus,  and  its  commen- 
tator, Schrader,"  and  which  he  subsequently  ex- 
plained. How  came  Janus  to  refer  to  propositions 
utterly  different  t  Was  it  an  illusion  t  or  was  it  a 
falsification  }     We  will  not  determine. 

What  the  authors  say  as  to  the  condemnation  of 
the  Treaty  of  Westphalia  by  Innocent  X.,  and  as 
to  the  declaration  of  Pius  VI.  about  its  non-ratifi- 
cation (p.  31),  without  any  regard  to  the  remarks 
long  since  made  thereupon  by  theologians  and 
canonists,^'    has   already  received    in   a  Catholic 

^^  Deutschland  vor  und  nach  dem  Krieg  von.  1866.  Mainz,  1867, 
p.  134,  seq.    [Germany  Before  and  After  the  War  of  1866.] 

^^  These  words  ought  to  have  merited  a  more  accurate  apprecia- 
tion on  the  part  of  the  critic- 

-■^  Dr  Döllinger,  in  the  work  already  cited  (p.  49  and  seq.)^  speaks  as 


Making  the  Syllables  Dogmatic. 


ö:i 


periodical'^  the  merited  correction.  The  same 
journal  has  done  equal  justice  to  the  account  of 
the  proceedings  of  Pope  Innocent  III.  in  regard  to 
the  Magna  Charta  of  England,  "  the  pretended 
noble  mother  of  European  Constitutions ; "  pro- 
ceedings which  are  denounced  by  Janus  without 
the  slightest  indication  of  the  special  legal  relations 
of  the  time  (p.  23). 

To  show  the  ideas  of  Pope  Pius  IX.  respecting 
the  penal  power  of  the  Church,  'the  condemnation 
of  the  writings  of  the  Turin  professor,  J.  N.  Nuytz, 
which  but  advocate  doctrines  long  ago  censured,  is 
alleged  ;  and  two  other  special  documents  are  ad- 
duced in  proof  (p.  11).  Here  we  read:  "In  the 
Concordat  made  in  1863  with  the  Republics  of 
South  America,  it  is  laid  down  in  Article  8,  that 
the  civil  authorities  are  ^to/z//^^  bound  to  execute 
every  penalty  decreed  by  the  spiritual  courts." 
Now  as  there  are  different  South  American  Repub- 
lics, so  there  are  different  Concordats  with  these. 
We  know  that  of  Bolivia,  in  twenty-nine  articles, 
dated  29th  May  185 1  ;  that  of  Guatemala  and 
Costa  Rica,  7th  October  1852  ;  that  of  Nicaragua, 
2d  November  1861  ;  and  that  of  San  Salvador,  22d 
April  1862,  both  published  only  in  1863. '9     One  of 

follows :  —  "  The  Pope,  indeed,  did  not  protest,  because  he  desired 
not  the  establishment  of  a  just  peace  between  Protestants  and 
Catholics,  the  whole  subsequent  history  has  proved  the  contrary ; 
but  because  it  was  expedient,  and,  indeed,  an  imperious  duty  for 
him,  to  enter  a  protest  against  a  profoundly  immoral  and  unchris- 
tian principle,  which,  in  respect  to  religious  stipulations,  was  at  the 
bottom  of  that  whole  Treaty  of  Peace — I  mean  the  territorial  sys- 
tem, on  the  principle,  '  Citjiis  regio,  ejus  est  religio, '  '  whoso  is 
master  of  the  territory  is  master  of  the  religion.' " — Compare 
Phillips's  Canon  Law,  ill.  §  141,  p.  465-477;  Walter's  Canon 
Law,  §  113. 

^*  The  Historish-politische  Blätter  of  Munich.  Vol.  Ixiv.  No.  4, 
p.  320,  seq, 

^^  Acta  Pii  IX.,  vol.  i.  p.  452,  seq.  ;  509,  seq. ;  Prof.  Sentis,  in 
the  Archives  for  Catholic  Canon  Law,  t.  xii.  p.  225,  seq.  (Ger- 
man.) 


36         Making  the  Syllabus  Dogmatic. 

the  later  Concordats  seems  to  have  been  intended. 
But  of  the  stipulation  just  cited  not  a  trace  is  to 
be  found.  The  eighth  article  treats  of  the  Presi- 
dent's Indult  in  the  nomination  of  bishops  ;  it  is 
only  in  articles  13-16  there  is  any  question  of 
jurisdiction,^"  which  in  matters  spiritual  belongs  to 
the  Church,  which  in  the  civil  affairs  of  ecclesias- 
tics is  abandoned  to  the  secular  judge,  as  also  in 
criminal  cases,  in  which  they  may  be  involved, 
provided  he  be  in  the  second  and  third  instance  as- 
sisted by  two  ecclesiastical  judges  ;  while  to  bishops 
is  adjudged  the  exercise  of  the  full  penal  power 
against  clerics  who  have  forgotten  their  duty. 
The  Convention  of  Guatemala  subjoins  in  its  hi- 
teenth  article  a  clause,  that  in  case  of  any  disputes 
between  ecclesiastics,  an  episcopal  certificate,  at- 
testing the  previous  attempts  of  the  ordinary^  to 
bring  about  a  reconciliation  between  the  parties, 
must  be  produced  before  the  secular  functionary 
should  be  allowed  to  try  the  suit.  Janus  seems 
not  to  have  understood  the  text,  or  at  least  to  have 
had  before  him  some  inaccurate  accounts  of  it. 

2. '' In  a  letter  of  Pius IX.," says  Janus,  "addressed 
to  Count  Duval  de  Beaulieu,  published  in  the 
Allgemeine  Zeitung  of  November  13,  1864,  the 
power  of  the  Church  (it  should  be  said,  of  the 
Roman  Ctiria)  over  the  government  of  civil 
society,  and  its  jurisdiction  in  temporal  matters, 
is  expressly  guarded  "  (p.  12). 

The  passage  of  the  letter  in  question,  communi- 
cated only  in  the  way  of  extracts  by  \\iQ  Allgemeine 
Zeittmg,  and  which  the  Secretary  of  the  Latin 
correspondence  by  desire  of  the  Pope  addressed  to 
the  above-named  count  on  the  22d  October  1864, 
on  occasion  of  his  writing,  entitled  ''  The  Freedom 
of  Error  in  the  Free  State,"  runs,  according  to  the 

20  Sentis,  loc.  cit.,  p.  237.,  seq. 


Älakiftg  the  Sy Habits  Dogjuatic.         37 

text  of  the  Augsburg  Journal,  as  follows  :  "  Many 
who  admit  the  duty  of  submission  to  all  decisions 
of  the  Church  in  matters  of  faith  and  morals,  wish 
to  withdraw  from  her  competence  the  government 
of  civil  society,  and  rest  herein  011  their  ozun  judg- 
ment, as  if  civil  government  also  were  not  subject  to 
the  laws  of  justice  arid  of  truth,  and  as  if  the  best 
polity  of  nations  were  7iot  also  traced  out  in  Holy 
Writ,  whose  interpretation  belongs  to  the  Church." 
Now,  it  is  one  thing  to  say,  the  civil  power  must 
conform  to  the  laws  of  truth  and  of  justice  an- 
nounced by  the   Church  ;  for  this   is  involved  in 
the  very  nature  of  the  Christian  State,  such  as  it 
should  be;'"''  but  quite  another  thing  to  assert  the 
Church  has  a  direct  jurisdiction  in  affairs  of  State. 
In   their    context,    the   words  do   not   say   what 
Janus   makes    them   say.       They  reserve  to   the 
Church  the  competence  of  judgment  and  of  de- 
cision, but  not  the    competence  of  "  direct  juris- 
diction."      Never  has  the  Church  recognized  the 
principle,  that   there   are  other   laws  of  morality 
for  the  collective  body,  for  the  State,  and  others 
for    the    individual.     '  Accordingly    she    requires 
of  those  clothed  with  political  power,  that  they 
should  conform  to  those  laws,  and,  indeed,  such  as 
she  proclaims  them.     Were  she  to  abandon  this 
postulate,  she  would  then  renounce  her  very  mis- 
sion.    He,  indeed,  who  is  possessed  with  the  idea 
that  the  Church  or  the  *'  Curia','  particularly  since 
the  Encyclical  and  the  Syllabus  of  1864,  aims  at 
nothing  less  than  the  annihilation  of  the  modern 
State,  and  the  restoration  of  the  mediaeval  supre- 

21  Aug.  Ep.  48  ad  Vincent :  "  Serviant  reges  terrce  Christo,  etiam 
leges  ferendo  pro  Christo."  Cf.  c.  lit.  Tetil.  ii,  92  ;  Ep.  185.,  al.  50, 
ad  Bonifac.  Greg.  M.  L.  11,  Ep.  ii  ad  MauriU.  Imp.  Leo  M.  Ep. 
125,  al.  75  ad  Leon  Aug.  Bossuet  sermon  sur  I'unite  de  I'Eglise, 
oeuvres  compl.  iv.  306. 


38        Making  the  Syllabus  Dogmatic. 

macy  of  the  hierarchy  over  it;^^  he,  indeed,  will 
strive  to  interpret  everything  in  a  sense  corre- 
sponding to  this  his  view. 

On  such  feeble  props  is  founded  what,  im- 
mediately after  these  so-called  documents,  Janus 
affirms  as  follows  : — "  //  follows  that  they  are 
greatly  mistaken  who  suppose  that  the  Biblical 
and  old  Christian  spirit  has  prevailed  in  the 
Church  over  the  mediaeval  notion  of  her  being  an 
institution  with  coercive  power  to  imprison,  hang, 
and  burn.  On  the  contrary,  these  doctrines  are  to 
receive  fresh  sanction  from  a  General  Council ;  and 
that  pet  theory  of  the  Popes,  that  they  could  force 
kings  and  magistrates,  by  excommunication  and 
its  consequences,  to  carry  out  their  sentences  of 
confiscation,  imprisonment,  and  death,  is  now  to 
become  an  infallible  dogma  !  It  follows  that  not 
only  is  the  old  institution  of  the  Inquisition  justi- 
fied, but  it  is  recommended  as  an  urgent  necessity  in 
view  of  the  unbelief  of  the  present  age"  (p.  12). 

But  with  other  documents,  also,  Janus  is  not  a 
whit  more  successful.  As  before  in  the  third  article, 
so  now  at  p.  31,  he  refers  to  an  instruction  sent  by 
Pope  Pius  VII.  to  his  nuncio  at  Vienna  in  the  year 
1805,  without  dreaming  that  the  genuineness  of 
this  document  is  more  than  disputable.^^ 

With  more  success,  Janus  rests  on  another  public 
act,  which  is  to  serve  as  a  proof  "  that  even  the 
Bavarian  constitution,  too,  with  its  equality  of 
religious  confessions  and  of  all  citizens  before  the 
law,  is  looked  on  with  an  evil  eye  at  Rome"  (p. 
27).     The  document  in  question  ^'^  comprises  the 

-^  Frohschammer,  loc.  cit.,  p.  vi. 

-^  Gosselin  Pouvoir  du  Pape,  au  moyen  age.  Louvain,  1845  ;  "' 
452-455.  F.  Walter's  Canon  Law,  §  343.  Note  9,  p.  739,  xiii., 
ed. 

2^  Fogli  dottrinali  (which  were  sent  with  the  Papal  Brief  of  the 


Making  the  Syllables  Dogmatic.        39 

complaints  of  the  Holy  Sec  as  to  the  religious 
edict  of  Bavaria,  and  its  antagonism  to  the  con- 
cordat of  1 8 1 7 — complaints  which,  for  the  most  part, 
long  before  these  Papal  acts  were  known,  had  been 
uttered  in  the  country  by  Catholic  ecclesiastics. 
No  protest  is  made  against  the  first  section  of  the 
Religious  Edict,  which  secures  to  all  the  inhabi- 
tants of  the  country  perfect  freedom  of  conscience ; 
nor  against  the  second  section,  which  forbids  coer- 
cion in  matters  of  faith.  But  a  protest  is  made 
against  the  fourteenth  section,  touching  the  division 
according  to  sexes  of  the  children  of  mixed  mar- 
riages ;  against  the  regulations  as  to  the  religion 
of  foundlings  in  the  twenty-second  section ;  in 
general,  against  looking  on  religion  as  a  matter 
of  absolute  indifference  ;  against  the  eighteenth 
section,  on  the  different  cases  arising  from  a  change 
of  religion  on  the  part  of  parents  ;  against  the 
prohibition  of  embracing  another  religion,  before 
the  legal  age  of  majority  has  been  attained,  as  laid 
down  in  the  sixth  section.  Further,  complaint  is 
made  as  to  the  complete  parity  of  religions,  but 
not  as  to  the  equality  of  the  followers  of  those 
religions  ;  the  complaint  turns  on  the  spirit  of  in- 
differentism  which  pervades  the  whole  law.  On 
the  eightieth  section,  which  runs  as  follows,  "  The 
religious  communities  existing  in  the  State  owe 
equal  respect  to  each  other,"  we  must  observe,  that 
the  question  regards  not  the  members  of  religious 
communities,  but  the  communities  themselves ;  or, 
in  other  words,  the  very  principles  which  they 
profess.  To  prescribe  a7i  equal  respect  for  another 
religious  community  (not,  observe,  for  the  persons  oi 
its  members),  is  to  require  that  the  doctrines  of  the 

13th  January  1819  from  Rome  to  Munich),  in  the  work  entitled 
•'  The  Concordat  and  the  Constitutional  Oath  of  Catholics  in 
Bavaria."     Augsburg.  1847.     Pp.  244-249. 


40        Making  the  Syllabus  Dogmatic. 

true  Church  should  be  placed  on  the  same  level 
with  the  opinions  of  the  other  religious  bodies. 
This  interpretation,  Rome,  from  her  point  of  view, 
must  needs  make  ;  but  we  here  see  the  great  dis- 
tinction between  principles  and  perso?is,  which  our 
opponents  totally  ignore.  The  other  part  of  this 
document  regards  the  contradiction  between  the 
second  appendix  of  the  Constitution  and  the 
Concordat  in  its  articles  I,  17,  9-12,  as  well  as 
the  fifty-eighth  section  of  the  first  respecting  the 
Placet. 

From  the  Bavarian  Constitution  Janus  passes 
(p.  28)  to  that  of  Austria,  as  well  as  to  the  Papal 
Allocution,  "Nunquam  certe,"  of  the  22d  June  1868, 
on  the  violation  of  the  Concordat,  and  on  the  laws 
issued  against  it.  He  has,  however,  forgotten  to 
answer  the  question,  why  the  Pope  has  not  con- 
demned the  diploma  of  20th  October  i860,  which 
secured  to  Protestants  equality,  and  the  patent  of 
the  8th  April  1861,  which  carried  out  the  same 
more  fully  and  precisely.  He  has  entirely  over- 
looked the  way  in  which  the  convention  of  1855 
has  been  undermined,  the  interests  of  the  Catholic 
majority  sacrificed  to  a  noisy  minority,  and  mar- 
riage and  education  for  the  most  part  withdrawn 
from  the  jurisdiction  of  the  Church.  Pie  wishes  only 
to  prove  "  the  deep  hatred  which  lies  at  the  bottom 
of  the  soul  of  every  genuine  Ultramontane,  of  free 
institutions,  and  the  whole  constitutional  system" 
(p.  22).  Hence  he  distinguishes  not  between  Con- 
stitutions, considered  in  themselves,  and  Constitu- 
tions which  are  formed  with  the  express  object  of 
ministering  to  the  ecclesiastical  and  the  political 
Revolution,  nor  between  particular  enactments  of 
the  same  Constitution.^^ 

2^  That  the  constitutionalism  which  from  Piedmont  has  been  pro- 
pagated throughout  Italy,  had  such  objects  in  view,  has  long  been 


Makuig  the  Syllables  Dogmatic.         41 

The  whole  reasoning  in  this  section  labours  under 
an  incredible  confusion  of  ideas.  This  is  manifest,  for 
example,  in  theassertionthat  the  doctrineof  the  mere 
le""al  oriijin  of  ecclesiastical  immunities,  condemned 
in  the  thirtieth  thesis  of  the  Syllabus,  is,  with  the 
sanction  of  the  Council,  to  be  made  Jicrcsy{^.  17  in  the 
original).  Here,  again,  we  have  the  first  of  those 
false  suppositions  noted  above,  and  next  we  see 
how  the  doctrine  of  theologians  and  canonists  re- 
specting ecclesiastical  immunities,  and  their  differ- 
ent classes,  has  not  been  in  the  least  attended  to. 
The  natural,  internal  foundation  of  the  same  is  con- 
founded with  their  outward,  concrete  formation  and 
development.^^  This  confusion  of  ideas  is  further 
manifest  when,  in  reference  to  the  thirty-eighth  pro 
position  of  the  Syllabus,  it  is  said,  "  Those  also  will 
become  guilty  of  heresy,  who  write  or  teach  that 
the  extravagant  pretensions  of  the  Popes  contri- 
buted to  the  separation  of  the  Eastern  and  Western 
Churches,  though  this  may  be  discovered  in  official 
documents  from  the  twelfth  to  the  sixteenth  cen- 
tury, and  in  the  avowals  of  a  number  of  contempo- 
rary authorities."^^  That  proposition  may  well  be 
characterized  as  false  and  temerarious,  but  by  no 
means  as  heretical.  Besides,  already  in  the  eleventh 
century,  the  names  of  the  Popes  had  been  struck 

admitted.  Pius  IX.  had  had  experiences  enough  with  the  consti- 
tution of  1848,  as  all  the  world  but  too  well  knows.  Hence,  when 
the  Papal  Government,  shortly  after  its  restoration  in  1850,  pro- 
nounced itself  against  the  constitution  in  Tuscany  (as  alleged  by 
our  author  at  p.  26),  this  is  much  less  astonishing  than  the  infer- 
ences deduced  therefrom  by  Janus. 

26  Compare  on  this  subject  the  theological  opinion  of  Professors 
Schmid  and  Thalhofer,  in  Munich,  as  well  as  that  of  the  Theologi- 
cal Faculty  of  Würzburg,  in  reply  to  the  third  question  proposed  by 
the  Bavarian  Government. 

27  The  Syllabus  condemns  proposition  38,  "  Division!  Ecclesioe  in 
orientalem  atque  occidentalem  Romanorum  Pontificum  arbitria  con- 
tulerunt." 


42        Making  the  Syllabus  Dogmatic. 

out  of  the  dyptichs  of  the  Greek  Church,  which 
was  the  surest  sign  and  the  clearest  expression  of 
a  schism  that  had  been  already  consummated — a 
schism  which  far  other  motive  agents  had  brought 
about.^^  Against  this  fact,  later  avowals  could  not 
avail.  The  Papal  pretensions  might  contribute  to 
the  spread,  but  not  to  the  rise,  of  the  schism ;  and 
if  the  Latins  repeated  what  the  Greeks  alleged, 
these  testimonies  in  themselves  have  no  decisive 
weight,  more  especially  as  others  can  be  opposed 
to  them. 

The  strongest  achievement  of  Janus,  however,  is 
the  insinuation  that,  on  a  favourable  opportunity, 
the  bishops  and  clergy  will  deny  the  obligatory 
force  of  any  constitutional  oath  they  may  take. 
But  all  theologians  and  laymen  know  that  the  Pope 
can  do  nothing  against  the  divine  law ;  that  he 
cannot  dispense  from  the  observance  of  the  fourth 
commandment ;  that  all  Papal  laws,  even  if  they 
must  be  regarded  as  irreformable,  still  do  not  cease 
to  be  human.  In  no  wise  "  are  falsehood,  treachery, 
and  dissimulation  cherished,  fostered,  and  propa- 
gated from  one  generation  to  the  other"  (p.  17). 
The  maxims  of  the  Church  were  not,  and  are  not 
any  mystery,  and  neither  were  nor  are  opposed  to 
the  observance  of  sworn  constitutions,  though  not 
eveiy  nciv  constitution  which  the  dominant  Liber- 
alism may  think  fit  to  impose,  can  be  sworn  to 
without   hesitation    by   Catholic   bishops,   priests, 

2^  I  have  elsewhere*  expressed  myself  more  precisely  ont  his  mat- 
ter. Pichler's  History  of  the  ecclesiastical  schism  has  not  furnished 
the  proof  given  in  the  text,  and,  moreover,  contains  a  series  of  his- 
torical blunders,  whereof  a  portion  the  author  himself,  in  his  second 
volume,  saw  himself  called  on  to  correct,  though  many  others  may 
still  be  pointed  out.  The  statement  referred  to  in  the  text,  Catholic: 
theologians  have  long  ere  this  refuted.  I  may  refer,  for  example, 
to  "  Bennetti's  Vindic,"  par.  ii,  t.  iii.,  p.  720,  seq. 

*  In  the  author's  life  and  writings  of  the  Patriarch  Photius  (Tr.) 


Making  the  Syllabus  Dogmatic,         43 

or  even  laymen.  This  was  already  known  to 
all  the  world.  In  Bavaria,  for  example,  from  the 
year  181 8  to  1821,  grave  negotiations  were  carried 
on  respecting  the  Constitutional  Oath  ;  ^^  and  these 
negotiations  were  later  renewed.  But  there  was  ever 
found  a  possible  way  for  setting  aside  serious  con- 
flicts. It  is  only  where  false  suppositions  without 
number,  as  in  the  pages  of  "Janus,"  are  allowed  to 
prevail,  mistrust  will  be  found  invincible.  To  such 
hypotheses  belong  the  following,  to  wit — that  the 
Episcopate  and  the  clergy  are  only  watching  for 
the  opportunity  to  get  rid  of  their  oaths — that  the 
Pope  can  abrogate  the  Divine  law — that  the  duty 
of  submission  to  him  begins  only  with  the  defi- 
nition of  his  infallibility — that  the  doctrines  of  the 
Syllabus  are  those  of  the  Jesuits,  and  of  their 
patrons  only — that  the  former,  like  the  latter,  are 
bent  on  the  annihilation  of  the  civil  power,  where 
they  are  unable  to  subjugate  it. 

According  to  the  representation  here  laid  before 
us,  "  Church  and  State  are  like  two  parallel 
streams,  one  flowing  north,  the  other  south.  The 
modern  civil  constitutions,  and  the  efforts  for 
civil  government,  and  the  limitation  of  arbitrary 
royal  power,  are  in  the  strongest  contradiction  to 
Ultramontanism,  the  very  kernel  and  ruling  prin- 
ciple of  which  is  the  consolidation  of  absolutism  in 
the  Church.  But  State  and  Church  are  intimately 
connected  ;  they  act  and  react  on  one  another  ;  and 
it  is  inevitable  that  the  political  views  and  ten- 
dencies of  a  nation  should  sooner  or  later  influence 
it  in  Church  matters  also"  (p.  21). 

Here  we  might  enforce  various  considerations, 
and  especially  remind  our  readers  that,  as  ex- 
perience shows,  this  very  **  Ultramontanism  "  has 

29  Vide  the  already  cited  work,  "The  Concordat  and  the  Con- 
stitutional Oath,"  p.  no,  seq.  (in  German). 


44        Making  the  Syllabus  Dogmalic. 

existed,  and  still  exists,  under  all  forms  of  civil 
polity — that  religious  and  political  matters  are  to 
be  kept  perfectly  distinct — that  an  absolutism 
exhibiting  a  primitive  legal  title  in  the  religious 
and  moral  sphere,  showing  an  authority  conferred 
by  God,  is  far  more  easily  borne  than  any  other, 
and  is  very  compatible  with  struggles  for  freedom 
in  other  matters  ;  further,  "  that  Church  and  State, 
in  modern  cojistitntions,  are  no  longer  so  intimately 
connected  ; "  rather,  the  separation  of  Church  and 
State  has  been  already  introduced,  and  the  dangers 
of  national  decomposition  have  increased,  and  con- 
sequently in  the  interest  of  the  Church,  the  centre 
of  religious  unity  must  be  more  jealously  guarded. 
But  we  would  rather  ask,  How  comes  it  that,  in  the 
Middle  Ages,  in  the  flourishing  period  of  the  Papal 
power,  popular  liberties  were  far  greater  than  in  the 
period  of  its  decline,  contemporaneous  as  that 
decline  was  with  the  revival  of  regal  despotism  ?  ^° 
How  comes  it  that,  in  the  primitive  cantons  of 
Catholic  Switzerland,  the  Papal  "  absolutism " 
found  its  truest  adherents,  who  were  not  less 
decided  republicans  than  the  inhabitants  of 
North  America  are  at  the  present  day  ?  ^^  How 
comes  it  that  the  present  ''  efforts  for  the  limit- 


^"  With  regard  to  Germany,  to  Scandinavia,  to  the  Netherlands, 
to  Scotland  and  England,  see  the  evidence  in  Bollinger's  "  Church 
and  Churches,"  p.  96,  seq.  ;  p.  153,  seq.  (German  ed.)  With  regard 
to  Southern  Europe,  see  Balmez's  "  Catholicism  and  Protestantism 
Compared,"  part  iii.,  especially  c.  48  and  52. 

^^  Janus  (p.  26)  appeals  to  the  oral  expressions  of  an  American 
bishop  as  to  the  situation  of  Catholics  in  the  United  vStates.  By 
Protesfants  it  is  objected  to  them,  "  that  they  find  their  principles 
in  Papal  pronouncements  (the  same  reproach  is  addressed  to  Ultra- 
montanes  among  ourselves  also),  and  cannot  thet-efore  honestly 
accept  the  common  liberties  and  obligations  of  a  free  state,  but 
always  cherish  an  arriere-pensee  that,  if  ever  they  become  strong 
enough,  they  will  upset  the  constitution."    The  same  has  been  said 


Making  the  Syllabus  Dogmatic.         45 

ation  of  arbitrary  royal  power"  arc  far  from 
exhibiting  the  moral  and  political  results  which 
so  many  modern  coryphaei  of  Liberalism  fore- 
told ;  that  in  many  strata  of  society  they  are 
regarded  with  mistrust,  as  favouring  only  one 
class — the  bourgeoisie  and  the  capitalists  ;  that 
minorities  not  a  few,  and  entitled  to  the  highest 
respect,  complain  of  oppression  by  fraud,  violence, 
and  forgery,  and  look  on  equality  before  the  law, 
and  on  the  parity  of  political  rights  and  duties,  as 
merely  illusive,  and  resting  only  on  paper  ?  How 
comes  it,  that  we  must  hold  the  condition  of 
modern  states  to  be  so  perfect,  and  the  existing 
relations  of  the  Church  to  be  so  reprehensible  ? 
How  comes  it,  that  at  the  present  day  the  Catholic 
people,  which  surely  has  its  instincts,  and  more 
than  instincts,  is  in  Germany,  France,  and  other 
countries,  a  far  more  solid  support  of  the  Papal 
throne  than  its  several  governments  ? 

The  section  inscribed  with  the  title  of  this  chapter 
(pp.8-36),I,apoorignorant  man,  have  repeatedly  and 
attentively  perused,  and  have  afterwards  asked  my- 
self the  question,  What  have  I  thence  learned?  First, 
I  meet  with  the  ingenious  remark,  "  The  bishops 
assembled  at  the  Council  have  nothing  to  do,  but 
to  set  the  conciliar  seal  on  a  work  which  the  Jesuit 
Schrader,  with  right  foresight,  has  already  prepared 
to  their  hand"  (p.  9).  Oh,  too  happy  bishops  ! 
They  can  give  festive  entertainments  and  ban- 
quets, give  themselves  up  to  the  enjoyments  of 
art,  parade  in  the  pubhc  processions  with  mitre  and 
cope,  indulge  in  the  siesta;  for  the  long-sighted 
Jesuit  father  has  provided  for  everything  else,  and 

by  Protestants  in  Holland,  England,  Germany,  and  the  rest.  The 
North  Americans  can  give  very  tranquillizing  assurances  {videT)6\- 
linger,  loc.  cit.  p.  46-48),  and  by  deeds  overcome  distrust. 


46        Making  the  Syllables  Dogmatic. 

to  set  the  conciliar  seal  is  no  arduous  labour !  At 
most  one  has  but  to  answer,  "  Placet,"  and  all 
is  settled.  Less  clever  folks  take  not  such  high 
flights,  have  far  other  notions  as  well  of  bishops 
as  of  the  work  appointed  for  them  at  Rome,  and 
have,  besides,  been  favoured  with  other  experiences, 
which  they  are  not  in  the  enviable  condition  to 
trumpet  forth  vaingloriously  before  the  world. 
But  why  speak  we  of  bishops,  who  have  nothing  to 
say  in  this  matter  ?  Nay,  all  the  world  knows 
beforehand  the  decrees  of  the  Council.  "  He  (the 
theologian  Schrader  of  the  Jesuit  order)  ,has  already 
turned  the  negative  statements  of  the  Syllabus  into 
affirmatives,  and  so  we  iioiv  can  (naturally  without 
waiting  for  the  Council  itself),  and  zuithoiit  any 
trouble^  anticipate  its  decisions  on  this  subject"  (p.  9). 
Yet  the  matter  appears  to  us  not  so  easy.  For 
independently  of  the  fact,  that  in  a  private  labour, 
the  criticism,  as  well  as  the  use  of  materials,  is 
open  to  every  one  ;  independently  of  the  fact,  that 
for  an  appreciation  of  the  Syllabus,  a  complete 
theological  knowledge  of  that  document  is  first  of 
all  necessary,  and  this,  as  can  be  shown,  is  not 
everywhere  found ;  yet,  in  case  the  impending 
CEcumenical  Synod  should  enter  on  a  detailed 
examination  of  its  contents,  an  explanation  of  it 
in  the  form  of  the  doctrinal  chapters  of  Trent,  in 
opposition  to  the  prevalent  confusion  of  ideas,  and 
"  to  the  lofty  licence  of  free  spirits,"  would  be,  as  many 
a  zealous  reader  of  "Janus"  may  have  perceived, 
no  such  light  task.  Janus,  indeed,  following  the 
celebrated  declaration  of  the  three  celebrated  weeks, 
calculates  with  mathematical  precision  the  day  (it 
is  exactly  the  festival  of  St  Thomas  ä  Becket,  the 
defender  of  ecclesiastical  freedom  in  England),  when 
in  the  year  of  grace  1 869,  which  has  never  realised  the 
fears  of  war  long  entertained,  the  "  Roman  CathoHc 


Making  the  Syllabus  Dogmatic.         47 

world  "  will  be  the  richer  by  five  whole  truths,  that 
under  pain  of  salvation  it  will  have  to  believe. 
Horace's  "  Credat  Juda^us  Apclla,  non  ego,"  oc- 
curred to  me,^""  and  the  investigation  of  Janus's 
documents,  instituted  before  an  inquiry  into  his 
proofs,  tended  to  augment  my  unbelief.  Still  ac- 
customed "  to  prove  all  things,  and  to  hold  fast 
that  which  is  good"  (2  Thess.  v.  21),  I  determined, 
in  an  hour  usually  devoted  to  recreation,  to  form  a 
lively  representation  of  these  five  truths.  They 
are  as  follows  : — "  First,  The  Church  has  the  right 
of  employing  external  coercion  ;  she  has  direct  and 
indirect  temporal  power."  ^^  This  proposition  would 
be  at  least  in  no  wise  absolutely  new ;  it  rests,  as 
Janus  knows,  on  mediaeval  views.  But  it  appears, 
according  to  him,  to  favour  the  tribunal  of  the 
Inquisition ;  and  in  this  connexion  the  two  recent 
canonizations  and  beatifications  of  inquisitors,  fol- 
lowing in  rapid  succession,  gain  a  new  and  remark- 
able significance"  (p.  13). 

Secondly,  The  proposition  as  to  the  right  of  the 
Popes  of  deposing  kings  at  will,  and  of  giving  away 
kingdoms  and  nations  at  their  good  pleasure,  we 
have  already  discussed  above.  It  is  a  doctrine  ab- 
solutely new,  unknown  even  to  the  Middle  Age. 
Examples  from  the  kingdom  of  Naples,  of  which 
the  Pope  was  lord  paramount,  and  wherein  he 
could  exercise  his  feudal  rights^'*  (whether  his  re- 

32  Satin,  lib.  I,  n.  5,  v.  loo-i. 

33  He  who  strictly  follows  the  laws  of  grammar  and  of  logic  will 
not,  •'  in  reference  to  the  contrary  of  the  words  '  neque  potestatem 
tillafJi  temporalem  directam  vel  indirectam,'"  will  not,  I  say,  be 
quite  clear  whether,  in  the  second  number  of  the  work  entitled 
"The  Pope  and  Modern  Ideas"  (p.  64),  the  contrary  has  been 
stated  with  indisputable  accuracy.  The  opposition  to  7{lla  might 
still  be  a  different  one. 

3*  About  the  Papal  rights  of  feudal  suzerainty  Janus  cares  little. 
Thus  (p.  387)  in  reference  to  Pope  Clement  XL  it  is  briefly  stated, 
that  Rome  claimed  rights  of  suzerainty  over  Parma  and  Piacenza  ; 


48        Making  the  Syllabus  Dogmatic. 

course  to  his  ecclesiastical  prerogatives  were  herein 
justifiable  or  no),  will  not  avail  to  support  the 
general  proposition  in  the  form  as  conceived  by 
Janus.  We  maintain  that  *'an  article  of  faith  such 
as  this,  that  the  Pope  can,  at  his  caprice,  and  for 
purely  political  or  pecuniary  ends,  deprive  millions 
of  innocent  men  of  what,  according  to  the  teaching 
of  the  Church,  are  the  necessary  means  of  salva- 
tion"^^ (p.  15)  such  a  doctrine,  we  say,  will  never 
be  defined,  either  by  a  Pope  or  by  a  Council. 

Thirdly,  What,  in  the  next  place,  appears,  gives 
us  no  theological  proposition,  still  less  the  embryo 
of  a  dogma.  The  question  is  only  as  to  the  cor- 
rections to  be  made  in  current  works  of  history, 
and  as  to  the  necessity  existing  for  all  Catholic 
authors,  who  are  preparing  books  on  history  or 
law,  to  publish  their  researches  before  the  30th 
December  1869  (p.  16) ;  "  for  afterwards  they  will 
have  the  savour  of  heresy." 

Our  prophet,  nevertheless,  announces  something 
else,  which  has  at  least  one  good  side.  **  There 
will  at  least,"  he  says,  ''  be  required  for  literary 
and  academical  work,  a  flexibility  and  elastic  ver- 
satility of  spirit  and  pen  hitherto  confined  to  jour- 
nalism"   (p.  16).    It  would  be  of  service  to  many  a 

and  that  still  later,  in  1768,  Clement  XIII.  07ice  again  invaded  the 
sovereign  rights  of  the  Duke  of  Parma  by  excommunication.  But 
the  Pope's  rights  of  suzerainty  over  Parma  were  very  well  founded. 
— Compare,  for  example,  A.  Theiner's  "  Histoire  du  Pontificat  de 
Clement  XIV.,"  vol,  i.,  pp.  114,  115.  "Delia  Storia  del  Dominic 
Temporale  della  sede  Apostolica  nel  ducato  di  Parma.  Libri  tre. 
Roma,  1720,  ["  History  of  the  Temporal  Dominion  of  the  Apos- 
tolic vSee  in  the  Duchy  of  Parma,"  in  three  books.] 

^  The  interdict,  to  which  reference  is  here  made,  by  no  means 
deprives  men  of  the  means  of  salvation,  nor  of  the  exercises  of  re- 
ligion required  for  eternal  happiness.  Baptism  and  penance  especially 
are  not  interdicted  ;  and  it  is  rather  a  limitation  in  the  use,  than  a 
total  withdrawal  of  religious  rites  which  is  here  ordained. — Compare 
Walter's  "Canon  Law,"  §  191;  Phillips'  ''Manual  of  Canon 
Law,"  §  196,  p.  566,  seq. 


Making  the  Syllabus  Dogmatic,         49 

scholar,  if  he  would  throw  off  some  of  his  pedantry; 
if  he  would,  for  instance,  take  for  his  model  the  five 
Articles  on  the  Council,  that  appeared  in  the  All- 
getncine  Zcitungy  and  "  which  form  an  era  ; "  if  he 
would  imitate,  at  least  as  regards  polish  of  style, 
the  versatility  with  which,  according  to  the  expres- 
sion of  others,  many  enlightened  folks  know  how 
to  clothe  their  servility,  and  contrive  to  change 
their  views.  One  condition  only  is  requisite  ; — 
that  versatility  should  never  lead  to  the  disfigure- 
ment and  the  falsification  of  the  truth. 

Lastly,  follow  the  fourth  and  the  fifth  pretended 
new  dogmas,  religious  coercion  (p.  18),  the  con- 
demnation of  freedom  of  conscience,^^  and  finally 
the  condemnation  of  modern  civilisation,  and  espe- 
cially of  constitutionalism  (p.  21,  seq) 

We  have  found  here  nothing  more  than  what  is 
to  be  read  in  newspapers ; — nothing  which,  in 
addition  to  what  we  have  already  said,  is  really 
worth  the  trouble  of  refutation.  We  have  found 
the  whole  effusion  only  calculated  to  recruit  power- 
ful allies  against  the  pretended  pernicious  theory 
of  Papal  Infallibility,  which  Janus  has  above  all 
things  in  view. 

'^  Vide  the  Introduction  (apparently  the  work  of  an  able  theo- 
logian), to  the  edition  of  the  Encyclical,  brought  out  by  M.  Bachern 
of  Cologne  in  1865,  especially  p.  xxviii.,  seq.;  xxxii.,  seq. 


CHAPTER  IV. 


THE   DOCTRINE   OF   PAPAL  INFALLIBILITY. 


[HEN  theological  opinions,  held  by  cele- 
brated teachers,  are  combated,  though 
ever  so  warmly,  with  serious  argum.ents 
and  becoming  respect,  this  is  in  itself  not 
to  be  condemned,  nor  even  disapproved  of.  But 
bitter  invectives  and  gross  misrepresentations, 
which  can  lay  no  claim  to  scientific  controversy, 
are  worthy  of  the  severest  censure. 

In  the  dispute  on  the  inerrancy  of  Papal  Pro- 
nouncements ex  cathedra,  we  meet  with  a  doctrine 
which,  according  to  the  avowal  of  its  adversaries, 
prevailed  in  the  whole  Middle  Age^ — which  Pope 
Benedict  XIV.  declared,^  was  received  in  every 
country  except  France — which  even  in  thatcountry^ 


1  Pichler,  Ecclesiastical  Schism  between  East  and  West  (in  Ger- 
man), vol,  i.  p.  252,  253,  255,  vol.  ii.  p.  690.  Compare  Klee's 
"History  of  Dogmas,"  Dogmen-Geschichte,  vol.  i.  p.  92-97, 
Mayence,  1837.  [The  celebrated  Klee  told  me  himself,  he  firmly 
believed  in  Papal  Infallibility. — Tr.] 

2  Ep.  ad.  Inquis.  Hispan.  Anno  1748.  Op.  xv.  p.  117,  ed. 
Venet. 

'  For  example,  Duval,  De  suprem.  Rom.  Pontificis  auctoritate. 
Paris,  1614.  M.  Maucler  de  Monarchiä  divinä.  Paris,  1622. 
[More  eminent  French  theologians  than  Duval  and  Maucler  de- 
fended the  doctrine  of  Papal  Infallibility  in  the  seventeenth  cen- 
tury.  For  example,  at  the  commencement  of  that  age,  it  was 
advocated  by  Cardinal  Du  Perron,  in  its  middle  by  Cardinal 
Richelieu  (who  required  Richer  to  subscribe  a  formulary  of  be- 


The  Doctrine  of  Papal  Infallibility.     5  i 

itself,  was  never  without  defenders,  and  which  is  at 
the  present  day  advocated  by  distinguished  canon- 
ists and  theologians,  as  well  as  by  eminent  pre- 
lates/ 

Dieringer  says  of  himself,  "  I  belong,  as  is  well 
known,  to  that  class  of  theologians  who  deem  the 
grounds  for  belief  in  Papal  Infallibility  to  be  pre- 
ponderant, nay,  nearly  decisive.^  Klee  character- 
ised the  opinion  of  the  personal  infallibility  of  the 
Pope,  as  one  in  the  highest  degree  worthy  of  re- 
spect."^ And  Pichler,  who  certainly  can  by  no 
means  be  suspected  of  any  undue  flattery  towards 
Rome,  subjoins,  "  that  this  qualification  in  respect 
to  the  defenders  of  this  opinion,  must  certainly 
be  admitted  even  by  all  those  who  do  not  them- 
selves share  it."  ^  By  all,  indeed,  except  by  Janus, 
who  has  not  words  and  phrases  strong  enough  to 
stigmatise  the  doctrine,  who  represents  its  ad- 
herents as  miserable  flatterers,  and  foreseeing  and 
announcing  their  ascendancy  in  the  coming  CEcu- 
menical  Council,  has  designated  the  latter  a  synod 
of  flatterers,  and  a  counterpart  to  the  Latrocinium 
of  Ephesus. 

Yet  more  :  he  disfigures  this  doctrine,  draws  of 


lief,  not  only  in  the  siipremac\%  biit  in  the  infallibility  of  the  Pope 
ex  cathedra  ;  and  at  the  close  of  the  century,  the  doctrine  was  taught 
by  the  great  Fenelon. — Tr.] 

*  Here  we  need  only  name  the  French  canonist  Bouix,  as  well  as 
the  Abbe  Christophe  (author  of  the  "  Histoiy  of  the  Papacy  in  the 
Fourteenth  Century  "),  and  who  has  published  a  work,  "  Le  Concile 
et  la  Situation  Actuelle  "  Lyons,  1869.  p.  19,  seq.  And,  again,  the 
German  canonists  Phillips  and  Beidtel,  the  Bishops  of  Mayence  and 
of  St  Polten,  and  the  Archbishops  of  Westminster  and  of  Malines, 
who  surely  merit  all  respect. 

5  The  Theologico-Literary  Journal  (Theol.  Literatur-blatt),  of 
Bonn,  p.  138,  1866, 

6  Klee,  Dogmatik,  t.  i.  p.  245,  2d  ed. 

7  Pichler,  "  History  of  the  Ecclesiastical  Schism  between  East 
and  West,"  vol.  ii.  p.  746. 


5  2     The  Doctrine  of  Papal  Infallibility, 

it  a  hideous  caricature,  and  makes  it  a  real  bugbear 
for  the  cultivated  laity,  for  scholars,  and  for  states- 
men. The  fundamental  idea  had  been  already 
expressed  in  the  Gazette  of  AiLgsburg.  "To  de- 
clare the  Pope  infallible,"  it  was  there  said,  ''  is  to 
announce  the  destruction  of  the  world  ;  and  if  the 
Pope  were  himself  to  make  the  declaration,  he 
would  thereby  pronounce  himself  the  incarnate 
Antichrist/'  ^  The  destruction  of  the  world ! 
Antichrist !  The  death  of  all  civilisation  !  The 
boundless  power  of  the  Pope !  The  ruin  to  science 
and  to  the  State,  in  consequence  of  the  "  dogmatic 
creative  power  !"  and  "The  inspiration"  attributed 
to  the  Pope!  One,  indeed,  would  have  thought, 
that  in  case  Papal  Infallibility  were  to  be  defined, 
it  could  never  be  represented  as  anything  abso- 
lutely new,  anything  that  had  suddenly  fallen  down 
from  the  skies,  but  only  as  a  thing  consequent  on 
the  doctrine  of  eminent  theologians  of  preced- 
ing times.  To  these,  therefore,  one  should  have 
recourse,  in  order  to  learn  the  bearing,  the  purport, 
and  the  limitations  set  to  this  opinion.  But  before 
all,  the  violence  of  prejudice  left  no  time  for  such 
inquiries  ;  and  moreover,  a  monster  must  be  ex- 
hibited in  order  to  scare  the  multitude. 

The  defenders  of  the  doctrine  in  question  are 
far  from  such  a  monstrous  conception.  They 
distinguish,^  namely,  in  the  first  place,  between 
infallibility  as  the  product  of  mere  assistance,^^ 
and   inspiration;    while   our   opponent    identifies 

^  Allgemeine  Zeitung,  15th  June  1868,  in  the  essay  on  Froh- 
schammer's  work  entitled,  **  Christianity  and  the  Modern  Natural 
Sciences,"  Vienna,  1868. 

^  Dechamps,  Archbishop  of  Malines,  L'Infaillibilite  et  le  Concile 
General,  Paris,  c.  3.  Schneemann,  on  the  Teaching  Power  of  the 
Church.    Freib.  1868,  p.  41,  §  29,  p.  200,  §  331. 

^*' Denzinger,  (Four  Books  on  Religious  Knowledge,  vol.  ii.  p. 
152,  153  (in  German). 


The  Doctrine  of  Papal  Infallibility.     53 

both,  nay,  speaks  of  "the  power  of  dogmatic 
crcativcness"  as  ascribed  to  the  Pope  (p.  46). 
Secondly,  they  by  no  means  make  the  Pope 
the  sole  and  exclusive  organ  of  divine  truth  (p. 
64),  but  attribute  infalHbility  to  the  entire  body 
of  the  episcopate  also."  Thirdly,  they  assign 
limits  to  the  infallibility  of  the  Church,  and 
thus  to  that  of  the  Pope  also  ; — limits  which  are 
found  in  their  very  object,  the  dcpositinn  rcvela- 
tionis  ;^^  while  Janus  represents  this  power  as  ut- 
terly unbounded,  as  extending  to  all  dc[)artmcnts  of 
life  and  of  science  (p.  40).  F'ourthly,  this  inerrancy 
they  by  no  means  attribute,  as  our  author  every- 
where supposes,  to  all  Papal  manifestoes  without 
distinction.'^  Not  every  Papal  expression,  still 
less  action,  can  be  taken  to  be  a  dcfinitio  ex 
cathedra.  Mere  mandates  of  the  Pope  for  special 
cases,  and  for  particular  persons ;  judgments  on 
individuals  resting  on  the  testimony  of  third  per- 
sons, and  in  general  on  human  evidence  ;  declara- 
tions and  answers  to  the  inquiries  of  individuals  ; 
private  expressions  in  learned  works,  and  in  con- 
fidential letters — even  mere  disciplinary  decrees — 
belong  not  to  this  category  ;  and  hence  it  follows, 
that  most  of  the  cases  enumerated  by  our  adver- 
sary are  quite  irrelevant.  The  infallibilists  (to  make 
use  of  a  word  much  employed  by  Janus),  are  as  little 
obliged  as  the  fallibilists  (if  for  the  sake  of  brevity, 
as  well  as  of  contrast,  I  may  be  allowed  so  to  de- 
signate the  opposite  party), — the  infallibilists,  I 
say,  are  as  little  obliged  to  give  up  the  position  of 
Melchior  Canus  :  "  qui  summi  Pontificis  ouini  de 

'^  Schneemann,  loc.  cit.,  P.  no,  scq. 

^2  Reinerding,  Theol.  Fundament.,  Tract  i.,  P.  ii,  ^  i,  5,  n.  389, 
scq.  ;  n.  492,  seq.  Schneemann,  loc.  cit.,  ]i.  52,  stq.  Dcchamps,  loc. 
cit.,  c.  4.    Ketteler,  The  General  Council,  Mayence,  1869,  p.  78,  seq. 

^3  Reinerding's  loc.  cit.,  Tract  ii.,  P.  u,  §  3,  a.  3,  n.  455,  scq. 
Dechamps,  c.  11,  Schneemann,  p.  157,  .y^y. 


5  4     The  Doctrine  of  Papa  I  Inf  a  llibility. 

re  qiLalccnnqite  Judicium  temere  ac  sine  delectu  de- 
fendunt,  hos  sedis  Apostolicae  auctoritatem  labefac- 
tare,  non  fovere,  evertere,  non  firmare."  "'^  They  can 
reprehend  real  abuses  with  as  much  frankness  as 
Janus  himself;  but  they  will  still  reserve  to  them- 
selves the  right  of  protesting  against  a  mode  of  con- 
troversy (such  as,  with  an  utter  misrepresentation  of 
the  doctrine  combated,  is  carried  on  in  this  book), 
as  one  most  frivolous  and  most  unworthy. 

It  is  only  later  on,  quite  at  the  close  of  his  work, 
after  he  had  brought  into  the  field  whole  squadrons 
of  auxiliaries  raked  together  from  all  quarters, 
Janus,  in  some  measure,  bethinks  him  of  the  neces- 
sity of  more  nearly  inspecting  his  foe,  of  examining 
more  closely  into  the  doctrine  of  the  infallibilists. 
This  delay  is  fortunate  for  his  readers,  who  might 
otherwise  perhaps  have  lost  some  of  the  preceding 
valuable  pages.  He  observes  :  "•  The  distinction 
between  a  judgment  pronounced  ex  eathedrä,  and 
a  merely  occasional  and  casual  utterance,  is,  indeed, 
a  perfectly  reasonable  one,  not  only  in  the  case  of 
the  Pope,  but  of  any  bishop  or  professor.  In  other 
words,  every  one  whose  office  it  is  to  teach  can  and 
will  at  times  speak  off-hand  and  loosely  on  dogmatic 
and  ethical  questions  ;  whereas  in  his  capacity  of  a 
public  and  official  teacher,  he  pronounces  deliber- 
ately, and  with  serious  regard  to  the  consequences 
of  his  teaching.  No  reasonable  man  will  pretend 
that  the  remarks  made  by  a  Pope  in  conversation  ^^ 
are  definitions  of  faith.  But  beyond  this  nothing 
more  is  conceded  ;  for  the  mere  fact  that  the 
Pope  has  given  a  public  written  declaration,  consti- 
tutes it  an  ex  cathedra  pronouncement ; "   and  the 

1"  De  loc.  Theol.  v.,  5  ad  4.  Cf.  Bianchi  Op.  cit.  1.  i.,  §  21,  n.  i, 
p.  183. 

^^  Such,  for  example,  as  the  expressions  of  Pope  Innocent  X., 
cited  by  Janus  (p.  414),  from  the  works  of  Arnauld. 


The  Doctrine  of  Papal  Infallibility,    55 

expression,  privatiis  docto7\  when  used  of  a  Pope,  is 
like  talking  of  wooden  iron"  (p.  404-5).  Against 
this  view,  the  infaUibilists  will  certainly  protest. 
They  will  show  that  a  Pope  can  very  well  be  con- 
ceived to  be  a  private  teacher,  when  he  expresses 
in  a  private  way,  though  even  by  writing,  his  opin- 
ion ;  as  he  is  certainly  a  public  teacher,  when  he 
proclaims  in  the  face  of  the  whole  world  any  doc- 
trine ;  '^  and  again,  that  a  Pope,  in  the  composition 
of  scientific  works,  may  very  well  be  classed  with 
ordinary  writers.  Benedict  XIV.  as  Pope  com- 
pleted his  work,  ''  De  Synodo  Dioecesana,"  which  he 
had  previously  commenced.  Herein  he  expressly 
adhered  to  the  words  of  Melchior  Canus,  as  well 
as  to  the  example  of  his  predecessor  Innocent  IV., 
who,  in  like  manner,  after  his  elevation  to  the 
Pontifical  throne,  composed  his  Commentary  on 
the  Decretals  (p.  161)  ;  and  as  he  had  put  forth 
his  views  only  as  a  private  scholar,  he  abandoned 
these  to  the  full  liberty  of  discussion.'^ 

Against  further  objections,  the  infaUibilists  will 
argue,  that  the  divergence  of  theologians  on  minor 
points  does  not  do  away  with  their  consent  on  the 
chief  matter ;  and  that  in  all  essential  things 
the  most  eminent  divines  are  in  perfect  ac- 
cord.'^    If  the  theological  conceptions  of  the  last 

i^Bennettis'  Privileg.  S.  Petri  vindic,  P.  ii,  t.  v.,  Romx,  1759. 
App.  p .  402.  Bifariam  in  Pontifice  distingui  oportere  personam 
vice  plus  simplici  admonui,  qua  nempe  doctoris  publici  aliquando 
personam  gerit,  quamque  turn  gerere  reputandus  est  quum  Ecclesia 
universiz  edicit,  qua  doctoris  aliquando  privati  dumtaxat  personam 
induit,  quum  ad  particulares  quorumdam  expostulationes  respondet, 
sive  privatas  quasdam  suas  opiniones  depromit.  In  the  latter  case, 
quando  agitur  de  factis  mere  personalibus,  sive  de  factis  ad  forum 
contentiosum  pertinentibus,  sive  de  factis  pure  criminalibus,  tum 
falli  et  fallere  Pontificem  po3se,  nihilque  non  humani  pati  non  infi- 
ciamur. 

I''  Benedict  XIV,,  Praef.  in  op.  de  Syn.  Dioec.  fin. 

^^  Vide  the  Augsburg  Pastoral  Journal  of  9th  October  1869. 
No.  41,  seq.,  p.  323,  seq. 


5  6     The  Doctrine  of  Papal  Infallibility. 

three  centuries  have  become  more  precise  than 
those  of  the  earlier  schoolmen,  this  has  arisen 
from  the  opposition  the  doctrine  in  question  has 
experienced ;  but  even  among  the  schoolmen, 
equivalent  definitions  were  not  wanting.'^  The 
distinction  between  official  or  ex  cathedra  infalli- 
bihty,  and  the  possibility  of  a  personal  denial  of 
the  faith,  Janus  himself  believes  to  have  found, 
with  some  degree  of  probability  at  least,  even 
earlier ;  namely,  among  the  Gregorians  of  the 
eleventh  century.  (P.  115.)  If  some  theologians  re- 
quire that  the  Pope,  before  pronouncing  his  deci- 
sion, should  inform  himself  well  on  the  matter, 
should  carefully  examine  the  subject  in  all  its 
bearings,  should  consult  his  cardinals  and  theo- 
logians, further,  should  invoke  the  Holy  Spirit,  and 
institute  prayers  ; — so  other  divines  are  only  in  so 
far  opposed  to  these  conditions,  as  they  herein  re- 
cognise no  tokens  of  a  dogmatic  decree,  but  only 
pre-suppositions,  which  are  in  a  certain  degree  self- 
evident.  They  suggest  that  even  general  Coun- 
cils must  have  recourse  to  all  human  means  ;  and 
that  the  adoption  of  such  precautions  on  their  part 
must  ever  be  presumed ;  but  that  if  we  must  first 
certify,  whether  such  have  really  taken  place,  then 
every  decision  of  the  Church  can  be  questioned  and 
rejected  by  misbelievers.^^    In  this  most  theologians 

19  Of  more  ancient  authors,  compare  Rustic.  Diac.  adv.  Acepha- 
los.  (Bennettis,  p.  i,  t.  i,  p.  3).  What  Bonaventura  (in  his  Summ, 
q,  I,  a. 3,  d.  3)  states  as  preliminary  conditions  of  Papal  inerrancy, 
signifies  as  much  as  the  modern  ''  ex  cathedra." 

2**  Melchior  Canus  de  loc.  theol.  v.  5  :  Quae  res,  ut  de  concihis 
quoque  dicatur,  subsunt  omnino  causae  eaedem  :  Sive  Pontificum, 
sive  Conciliorum  diligentiam  in  fidei  causa  finienda  in  dubium 
vocant,  eos  necesse  est  omnia  Pontificum  judicia  ac  Conciliorum 
infirmare.  ...  Si  semel  haereticis  hanc  licentiam  permittimus,  ut 
in  quaestionem  vocent,  num  Ecclesiae  judices  eam  diligentiam  et 
curam  exhibuerint,  qua  opus  erat,  ut  quaestio  via  et  ratione  finiretur  : 
ecquis  adeo  caecus  est,  qui  non  videat,  mox  omnia  Pontificum  Con- 


The  Doctrine  of  Papal  Infallibility,     5  7 

agree,  that  a  definition  ex  cathedra  has  then  been 
pronounced,  when  the  Pope,  in  the  full  enjoyment 
of  his  freedom,  has,  in  a  decree  addressed  to  the 
whole  Church,  declared  an  opinion  to  be  heretical, 
and  laid  its  defenders  under  an  anathema,  or  as 
Janus  says,  "  cursed,"  or  proposed  any  proposition 
as  an  article  of  faith.  Nor  is  this  the  only  case, 
where  such  a  definition  is  admissible;  but  wher- 
ever the  Pope  unmistakably  announces  that  he,  as 
supreme  shepherd,  teacher,  and  judge,  ''as  the 
father  and  doctor  of  all  Christians  (to  use  the 
words  of  the  Council  of  Florence),  wishes  to  de- 
cide a  question,  and  to  bind  the  conscience  of  all 
believers/'  Hence  definitions  may  be  recognized 
by  the  customary  expressions,  without  this  or  that 
formula  being  absolutely  needful.^^  Herein  it  is 
only  the  main  decision  which  is  characterized  as 
binding ;  but  the  reasonings  and  the  rhetorical 
ornaments  of  a  Papal  Decree  constitute  no  stan- 
dard of  belief.^^ 

The  infallibilists  on  their  side  urge  the  close 
intercommunion  between  the  Pope  and  the  Church, 
which  they  assert  can  never  be  severed/"*  While 
the  GaUicans  regard  the  Papal  decisions  as  final 
and  irreformable,  when,  and  in  so  far  as  they  ex- 

cilionimque  judicia  labefactari?     Cf.  Thomassin  Dissert,  in  Con- 
alia,  Diss,  xviii.  n.  99. 

21  Bellarmin,  de  Rom.  Pontif.  iv.  3.  Suarez  de  fide  Disp.  v.,  § 
8.  Card.  Sfondat.  Gall,  vindic.  Diss.  iv.  §  4,  "•  I-  Bianchi  Op.  cit. 
L.  i.,  §  21,  p.  184.  Petrus  Ballerini  de  vi  ac  ratione  Primatüs,  c. 
15,  n.  24,  p.  288,  289.  ed.  Veronce.  Maur.  Capellari  (afterwards 
Gregory  XVI).  Triumph  of  the  Holy  See,  German  Trans., 
Augsburg  1833,  c.  24,  §  5,  p.  458.  '^^l'  So  also  the  ex -Jesuit 
Passaglia  in  his  polemical  writing  against  the  Encyclical  of  1864, 
(sopra  I'enciclica  promulgata  il  giorno  21  Decemb.  1864,  et  sopra 
le  80  proposizioni.  Domande  riverenti.  Torino  1865  (p.  56,  57).  For 
other  authors,  see  Phillips's  Canon  Law,  vol.  ii.  p.  340. 

22  Deschamps,  1.  c.  c.  11,  p.  136. 

23  Bennettis,  loc.  cit.  p.  409. 

24  Schneemann,  loc.  cit.,  p.  201,  seq.,  §  333,  seq. 


58     The  Doch'ifie  of  Papal  Infallibility. 

press  the  belief  of  the  Church  ;  ''^  the  former  teach, 
that  by  virtue  of  the  promises  of  Christ,  this 
is  always  the  case ;  for  Christ  bound  all  the  faith- 
ful in  general,  and  without  exception,  to  pay  obedi- 
ence to  Peter  and  his  successors.  But  never  can 
an  obligation  to  accept  error  be  regarded  as  sanc- 
tioned by  our  Lord.  God,  they  contend,  can  never 
permit,  that  believers  should  be  obliged  to  submit 
to  an  untruth ;  ^^  the  silentiuni  obsequiosum  of  the 
Jansenists  leads  to  hypocrisy ;  ^^  a  tribunal,  from 
which  lies  no  appeal,  yet  withal  fallible,  would  be 
an  engine  of  tyrannical  coercion/^  But  as  the 
obligation  to  accept  error  is  inconsistent  with  the 
will  and  the  character  of  Christ,  so  where  a  Papal 
sentence  is  binding  on  belief,  there  the  gift  of  in- 
fallibility follows  as  a  matter  of  course.  In  mat- 
ters, wherein  a  submission  of  faith  is  required,  the 
obligation  cannot  be  incumbent  on  one  believer, 
without  attaching  to  all  other  members  of  the 
Church,  Hence  it  is  not  so  absurd  as  some  would 
wish  us  to  believe,  (p.  407)  when  Bellarmine,  and 
after  him  so  many  others,  speak  of  a  decree  ad- 
dressed to  the  whole  Church  as  an  infallible  deci- 
sion. Moreover,  such  a  privilege  belongs  to  the 
Pope,  only  in  so  far  as  he  is  the  teacher  of  the 
wJwle  Clmrch.  That  in  earlier  times  the  Popes 
issued  decrees  of  faith  in  Synods,  alters  nothing  in 
the  case.  This  form  of  procedure  they  could  adopt 
even  at  the  present  day,  if  they  chose.     The  judi- 

^  Declar,  Cler.  Gallic,  1682,  art.  iv.,  Febron.  de  statu  EccL,  c.  vi., 
§  4,  n.  3. 

^  Veithde  primatu  et  infallibilitate  §  ii,  §  31,  x,?/.  Ballerini  Op. 
cit.  c.  15.     Devoti  Jus,  canon,  univ.  t,  i,  p.  90  seq. 

27  Phillip's  Can.  Law,  11,  §  89,  p.  326. 

'■*  On  the  prohibition  of  an  Appeal  from  the  Pope  to  another 
Judge,  and  even  to  a  Council,  compare  Bennettis,  P.  ii,  t.  iii.,  art. 
5-  §  3'  P-  571  >  ^^-  Pignattelli  Consultat  Canon.,  t,  ix.  Cons.  92, 
p.  240,  seq. 


TJic  Doctrine  of  Papal  Infallibility .     59 

cial  decision  was  assigned  to  the  Cathedra  Petri,''^ 
to  the  Prince  of  the  Apostles,  to  whom  the  pro- 
mise was  given,  and  who  Hves  and  judges  in  every 
Pope  for  the  time  being/° 

But  the  promise  of  Christ  alleged  by  the  infalli- 
bilists,  their  opponents  will  not  admit,  at  least 
not  in  an  equal  degree.  The  passage  in  Luke 
xxii.  32,  seq.,  applies,  according  to  Janus  (p.  96), 
to  Peter  personally,  to  his  denial  and  his  conver- 
sion. This,  however,  Catholic  theologians  deny. 
However,  the  word  eVtcrrpei/ra?  ^'  (converted)  may 
be  explained,  "  still  the  essential  unity  between  the 
special  occasion,  and  the  significance  of  Christ's 
word  of  promise,  embracing,  as  it  does,  all  times, 
may  easily  be  established."^^  "  The  see  of  Peter," 
observes  Professor  Döllinger,''was  to  remain  a  place 
of  truth,  a  citadel  of  firm  faith,  conducing  to  the 
strength  of  all ;  for  the  words,  as  well  as  the 
prayers,  of  our  Lord  were  addressed  not  merely 
to  the  individual  person,  and  for  the  immediate 
moment,  but  they  were  meant  to  lay  an  endur- 
ing foundation  ;  their  significance  was,  above  all, 
for  the  Church,  and  for  her  future  needs  beheld 
by  Christ  in  spirit."  ^^ 

When  Janus  further  observes,  that  not  a  single 
doctor  of   the   Church,   down  to  the  end  of  the 

29  Cf.  Felix  III.  (Syn.  Rom.)  ep.  12. 

2"  Bennettis,  P.  i,  vol.  I,  §  4.  Denzinger's  "Criticism  on  the  Lec- 
tures of  Thiersch,"  I,  p.  100  (in  German). 

31  Bede,  Maldonatus,  Grotius,  Bengel,  and  Ewald  interpret  the 
word  as  a  circumlocution  of  the  adverb  rursum,  vicissim  ;  and  with 
them  agrees  Schneemann,  loc.  cit.,  p.  173.  On  the  other  hand,  his 
former  confrere,  C.  Passaglia,  while  referring  to  other  passages  in 
Scripture,  explains  conversus  simply  as  the  participle,  yet,  unlike 
most  others,  understands  it  not  as  having  reference  to  contrition 
and  to  penance.  De  preerogativis  B.  Petri.  Ratisbon,  1850,  L.  ii. 
c.  13,  n.  198,  seq.,  p.  560, 

32  P.  Schegg,  Comment,  on  the  Gospel  of  St  Luke.  Munich, 
1865,  vol.  iii.  p.  253-254  (in  German). 

'^'^  Christianity  and  the  Church,  p.  32,  §  56,  ist  ed.  (in  German). 


6o     The  Doctrine  of  Papal  hifallibility, 

seventh  century,  has  given  the  interpretation  of  this 
text  disputed  by  him,  are,  therefore,  the  passages 
of  later  Popes,  and  of  Western  teachers  ;  ^'^  are, 
therefore,  the  splendid  testimonies  of  the  later 
Greeks,  such  as  the  patriarch  John  VI.  of  Constan- 
tinople (anno  715),^^  St  Theodore  the  Studite  (anno 
826),^^  and  the  exegetist  Theophylact  of  Achrida,^^ 
robbed  of  their  weight  ?  But  it  is  not  even  true, 
as  our  opponent  repeatedly  states  (p.  93),  that  the 
first  to  give  this  interpretation  was  Pope  Agatho, 
in  680,  "  when  trying  to  avert  the  threatened  con- 
demnation of  his  predecessor,  Honorius."  The 
same  interpretation  had,  on  the  8th  October  649, 
been  put  forward  in  Rome  by  Bishop  Stephen  of 
Dora,  the  envoy  of  St  Sophronius,  Bishop  of  Jeru- 
salem,^^ and  before  him  by  the  Popes  Gelasius, 
Pelagius  II.,  and  Gregory  the  Great ;  ^^  and  before 
these  again,  by  the  great  Leo/°  So  exceedingly 
trustworthy  are  the  statements  of  our  Janus  ! 
But  even  of  the   texts  in  Matt.    xvi.    18,  and 


'*  For  example,  John  viii.  ep.  76,  ad  Petrum  Com.  (Mansi.  xvii. 
65);  Leo  IX.  ep.  ad  Mich.  Cserul.  c.  7  (Will  Acta.,  p.  68);  S. 
Bernard,  ep.  190,  ad  Innoc.  II.,  Albertus  M.  (cited  by  Janus,  p. 
284). 

^^  Ep.  ad  Constantin.  Pap.  ap.  Combefis.  Auctar.  Bibl.  P.P.  Grase, 
ii.  211,  seq.  He  calls  "  the  Pope  the  Head  of  the  Christian  Priest- 
hood, whom,  in  Peter,  the  Lord  commanded  to  confirm  his  brethren." 

^'^  Lib.  ii.  ep.  12,  p.  1 153,  ed.  Migne.  He  says  openly  to  Pope 
Paschal  II.,  "To  thee  Christ  hath  spoken  the  words,  'Confirm 
thy  brethren.'  " 

•^^  Com.  in  Evangel.  Luc.  xxii.  (Migne  P.P.  Grsec.  cxxiii.  1 073). 
"This  (to  confirm  thy  brethren)  becometh  thee,  who,  after  me, 
art  the  Rock  and  the  foundation  of  the  Church.  We  may  sup- 
pose that  this  has  not  been  said  of  the  apostles  alone,  that  they 
were  to  be  confirmed  by  Peter,  but  of  all  the  faithful,  even  to  the 
end  of  the  world  :"  ws  hv  virocrTrjpixd^ci-f  vttö  tov  Uerpov,  dXXa  Kai 
irepl  irdjn-ojv  tQu  axpi  rrjs  avvreXelas  tou  aluvos  iricrTQu. 

2^  Mansi.  Cone.  x.  849.  Hard,  ill,  711-713.  Apud  Pichler, 
loc.  cit.,  p.  135. 

2^  Apud  Schneemann,  loc.  cit.,  p.  1 74,  §  288. 

*"  Leo.  M.  Serm.  iv.  c.  3,  4.     Cf.  serm.  83. 


The  Doctrme  of  Papal  Infallibility.    6 1 

John  XX.  1 8,  our  opponent  observes  as  follows  : — 
"  Of  all  the  fathers  of  that  time  (the  first  six  cen- 
turies of  our  era),  who  have  exegetically  explained 
these  passages  in  the  Gospels,  in  respect  to  the 
power  conferred  on  Peter,  not  a  single  one  applies 
them  to  the  Roman  bishops  as  Peter  s  successors  " 
(p.  91).  But  what  does  Janus  understand  by  exe- 
getical  explanations  ?  If  pure  exegesis  be  the 
question,  so  even  at  the  present  day,  it  were  quite 
sufficient  if  the  Catholic  exegetist  in  the  interpre- 
tation of  Matthew  and  John  confined  his  observa- 
tions to  Peter,  and  explained  the  import  of  our 
Lord's  words  merely  in  respect  to  him.  But  that 
the  prerogatives  bestowed  on  Peter  were  transmit- 
ted to  his  successors,  and  that  those  successors  are 
the  Roman  pontiffs,  is  a  truth  so  clearly  proclaimed 
by  tradition,  that  even  the  Gallicans  have  never 
called  it  in  question.'^^  But  when  in  the  interpreta- 
tion of  these  texts,  the  Fathers  inquire  into  the 
primacy  of  Peter,  then  they  characterize  it  as  a 
permanent  institution.  Further,  when  they  speak 
of  the  Roman  Bishop  for  the  time  being,  they  say 
of  him  he  occupies  the  see  of  Peter — he  sits  in  the 
chair  of  Peter — Peter  lives  and  works  in  him — in 
him  he  feedeth  all  the  Lord's  sheep." '^"  Have  they 
not  then  herein  given  sufficient  evidence  of  their 
convictions  ? 

As  Christ  said  to  his  disciples,  "  He  that  heareth 
you,  heareth  me  ;"  so  the  Fathers  exclaim,  "  Who- 
so heareth  the  Bishop  of  Rome,  heareth  Peter." *^ 
Bishop    Possessor  writes   to  Pope    Hormisdas  as 

41  Cf.  Bossuet's  Discourse  at  the  Assembly  of  1682,  and  with  this, 
Bennettis'  Op.  cit.  P.  i.,  t.  i.,p.  205. 

42  In  Cyprian  the  locus  Petri  is  the  same  with  the  locus  Fabiani 
(ep.  52,  al.  55,  Constant,  p.  165).  The  other  modes  of  speech  see 
in  Siric,  ep.  i.  ad  Himer.  n.  i.,  Bonif.  i.  ep.  4,  exord.  ep.  5,  n.  i.  p. 
102 1.    Leo  M.,  serm.  2,  c.  ii.,  serm.  3,  c.  4. 

*3  Cf.  Bennettis'  Op.  cit.  P.  i,  t.  i.,  p.  95,  seq. 


62     The  Doctrine  of  Papal  Infallibility. 

follows :  "  From  whom  is  the  strengthening  of  vacil- 
lating faith  more  to  be  looked  for  than  from  the 
bishop  of  that  see,  whose  first  occupant  heard  from 
Christ  those  words,  "  Thou  art  Peter,  and  on  this 
rock  I  will  build  my  Church  P"'^^  Leo  the  Great 
says  :  "  The  firmness  of  that  faith,  which  was 
praised  in  the  Prince  of  the  Apostles,  is  always 
enduring ;  and  in  the  same  way  as  what  Peter  be- 
lieved in  Christ,  to  wit,  His  divinity,  lasts  for  ever ; 
so  that  which  Christ  ordained  in  Peter,  namely, 
his  primacy  and  its  invincible  power,  is  ever  abiding. 
Thus  ever  lasts  the  ordinance  of  truth  :  Peter  per- 
severes in  the  rock-like  strength  conferred  on  him, 
and  always  holds  the  helm  of  the  Church  entrusted 
to  his  care."  This,  says  Leo  further,  is  even  at 
present  the  case ;  and  even  in  an  unworthy  heir 
this  dignity  has  not  ceased  to  exist.  So  even  now 
the  flock  (according  to  John  xxi.  i/,  i8)  is  still  led 
by  Peter,  who  confirmeth  his  successor,  and  prayeth 
for  him."^^  What  Peter  has  received,  says  Leo's 
predecessor,  Sixtus  III.,  that  he  has  transmitted 
to  his  successors.^^  In  the  same  way,  Gelasius 
derives  the  pre-eminence  of  the  Roman  Church 
directly  from  the  words  of  Christ  addressed  to 
Peter.^^  Theodore  the  Studite  calls  the  Roman 
See  the  See  of  the  Coryphaeus,  the  See  in  which 

^*  Possessor  ep.  IMigne.,  Ixiii ,  p.  489. 

45  Leo.  M.,  serm.  3,  c.  2-4 ;  serm.  4,  c.  4,  cf.  ep.  16,  init. 

46  Sixt.  III.,  ep.  6,  ad.  John  Ant.,  c.  5,  p.  120,  ed.  Coustant.  In 
the  same  way  Pope  Juhus  I.,  ep.  ad  Euseb.  n.  22,  ibid.  p.  388  : 
a  TrapeL\rj(pa/J.ev  irapa  rod  fxaKapiov  lÜTpov  rod  dirocTToKov,  radra  Kal 
i'luv  bri\(b.  Cf.  Liber,  ep.  8,  p.  432-  ["  The  things  we  have  re- 
ceived from  blessed  Peter  the  Apostle,  these  I  manifest  unto  you 

47  Gelas.  ep.  33,  n.  5.  Quamvis  universa  per  orbem  ecclesia 
catholica  unus  thalamus  Christi  sit,  sancta  tamen  Romana  ecclesia 
nuUis  synodicis  constitutis  cseteris  ecclesiis  prgelata  est,  sed  evan- 
gelica  voce  Domini  et  Salvatoris  nostri  primatum  obtinuit  :  Tu  es 
Petrus  et  super  hanc  petram,"  etc. 


The  Doctrine  of  Papal  Infallibility.     6 


Christ  has  deposited  the  keys  of  faith/^  and  from 
which  we  are  to  receive  the  certainty  of  faith/^ 
And  already  before  him,  Sergius,  the  MetropoHtan 
of  Cyprus,  addressed   Pope  Theodore  :  "  O  holy 
Head,  Christ  our  God  hath  destined  thy  Apostolic 
See  to  be  an  immovable  foundation,  and  a  pillar 
of  the  faith.     For  thou  art,  as  the  divine  Word 
truly  saith,  Peter,  and  on  thee  as  a  foundation- 
stone  have  the  pillars  of  the  Church  been  fixed.^° 
The  writings  of  the  Fathers,  whenever  they  speak 
of  the    Pope,    are   full   of    echoes    and    allusions 
to  those  Scriptural  words,^'  and  what  is  said  of 
Peter,  the  Popes  claim  decidedly  for  themselves. ^"^ 
The  Church,  as  well  as  \k\^pctra  or  rock  on  which  it 
is  founded,  passed  for  invincible. ^^  If  some  Fathers 
call  faith  the  foundation  of  the  Church,  so  this  they 
take  not  in  an  absolute  and  abstract  sense  ;  but  by 
it  understand  the  living  faith  of  Peter,  which  was 
the   reason  wherefore  he   was   chosen  to  be   the 
foundation-stone    of   the    Church.      Hence    theo- 
logians say,  the  faith   of  Peter  is  causatiter,  his 
^Qxson  formatiter,  the  basis  of  the  Church. ^"^     Not 
071  his  confession,  says  Dollinger,  but  on  account  of 
his  confession,  must  the  Church  be  founded  on  him 

*8  Theod.  Stud.,  1.  ii.,  ep.  63,  ad  Naucrat.  Migne.  xcix.,  1281,  a. 

'^  L.  ii.,  ep.  129,  ad  Leon.,  p.  1420  :  KÖLKeWev  {a-jrh  ttjs  'Pci/iijs)  t6 
äö-0aX^s  dexecrdu)  rrji  Trt'cTTewj.  [Thence  (from  Rome)  receive  the  cer- 
tainty of  faith]. 

^°  Ep.  ad  Theod.  lecta  in  Sess.  ii.,  Concil.  Lat.,  anno  649. 

*^  For  example,  S.  Ambros.  ep.  ad.  Sine.  (Constant,  epist.  Rom. 
Pontif.  p.  669,  ep.  n.  i).  Qui  diligenter  commissam  tibi  januam 
serves  et  pia  soUicitudine  Christi  ovile  custodias,  dignus,  quern 
oves  Domini  audiant,  et  sequantur. 

^-  Simplic.  Pap.  ep.  4  ad  Zenon.  Imp.  Perstat  in  successoribus  suis 
hsec  eadem  apostolicae  norma  doctrinae,  cui  Dominus  totius  curam 
ovilis  injunxit,  cui  se  usque  ad  finem  sceculi  minime  defuturum,  cui 
portas  inferi  nunquam  praevalituras  esse  promisit,  etc. 

^^  Origen,  torn.  xii.  in  Matt.  n.  II. 

54  Phihps's  Canon  Law,  i.  §  13,  p.  91,  et  seq.  Denzinger's  "  Criti- 
cism on  the  Lectures  of  Thiersch,"  i,  p.  53. 


64     The  Doctrine  of  Papal  Infallidility. 

— the  man  with  a  rock-like  firmness  of  character  ; 
for  the  Church,  as  it  consists  of  persons,  of  Hving 
beings,  then  also  needed,  and  always  needs,  a  living, 
personal  foundation.  As  the  edifice  of  the  Church 
is  one  destined  to  endure  for  all  times  ;  so  this  pre- 
eminence of  Peter,  which  with  him  as  the  founda- 
tion must  hold  the  Church  together,  necessarily 
after  him  passes  to  others  by  way  of  transmission.^^ 
The  power  of  binding  and  of  loosing  was  indeed 
imparted  to  all  the  Apostles  (Matt,  xviii.  i8),  but 
only  after  Peter,  and  on  the  pre-supposition  of  his 
primacy.  Next,  it  was  bestowed  upon  them  alto- 
gether, but  first  of  all  granted  to  Peter  alone.^^  The 
keys  of  the  kingdom  of  heaven,  too,  were  given  to 
him  only.^^  Janus,  indeed,  asserts  in  contradiction 
to  Döllinger,  that  it  is  against  all  the  Patristic  in- 
terpretations and  the  exegetical  tradition  of  the 
Church,  to  explain  the  power  of  the  keys  as  some- 
thing differing  from  that  of  binding  and  of  loosing. 
But  independently  of  the  fact,  that  this  exegetical 
tradition  is  by  no  means  constant  and  universal, 
one  prerogative  of  Peter  above  the  other  Apostles 
lies  in  the  extent  of  his  power,  and  in  its  degree. 

«  Loc  cit.  p.  31,  §  55. 

«55  Bennettis,  P.  i,  t.  i.,p.  48. 

^"^  Tertull.  de  praescr.  c.  22  :  Latuit  aliquid  Petrum  aedificandae 
ecclesiae  petram  dictum,  claves  regni  coelorum  consecutum?  De  pud, 
c.  21  :  super  te,  inquit,  aedificabo  ecclesiam  ineam,et  tibi  dabo  claves, 
non  ecclesiae.  Scorp.  c.  10.  Si  adhuc  clausum  putas  coelum,  me- 
mento claves  ejus  hie  Dominum  Petro,  et  per  eum  ecclesiae  reliquisse. 
Origen  on  Matt.  torn,  xiii.,  p.  31,  points  out  here  the  pre-eminence 
of  Peter  above  the  other  apostles.  Eulogius  of  Alexandria  (in  Phot. 
Bibl.  cod.  280,  1.  ii,,  c,  nov.),  remarks,  that  it  was  not  to  John  or 
to  any  another  apostle,  but  to  Peter,  Christ  gave  the  keys  (whatever 
Photius  might  contend).  Optatus  of  Milevi  de  Schism,  Donat.  L. 
vii.  3  :  Petrus  .  .  .  claves  regni  coelorum  communicandas  ceteris 
solus  accepit.  Stephen  of  Dora,  loc.  cit.  says  :  "  Claves  regni  coelo- 
rum creditae  sunt  Petro,  ac  ipse  unus  magnus  secundum  veritatem  et 
princeps  apostolorum  ad  claudendum  aperiendumque  illas  promeruit. 
Cf.  Ambros.  in  Luc,  L.  x.  n.  67.  Nyss.  de  castigat.  op.  iii.,p.  314. 
Morelli,  Basil  de  judicio  Dei,  n.  7. 


The  Doctrine  of  Papal  Infallibility.     65 

The  keys  of  the  kingdom  of  heaven  denote  the 
highest  spiritual  authority. ^^  Yet  this  question  does 
not  specially  concern  the  infallibilists; — it  belongs 
to  the  general  doctrine  of  the  Papal  supremacy, 
which  Janus  enters  on  without  a  careful  discrimin- 
ation of  the  particular  matters  in  dispute. 

Further,  it  is  asserted  by  our  opponent  ;  "  Up  to 
the  time  of  the  Pseudo-Isidorian  Decretals,  no 
serious  attempt  was  made  anywhere  to  introduce 
the  neo-Roman  theory  of  infallibility.  The  Popes 
did  not  dream  of  laying  claim  to  such  a  privilege" 
(p.  "jG).  It  seems  to  us,  however,  that  indepen- 
dently of  the  liturgical  formulas  used  at  Rome  in 
the  fifth  century,^^  a  very  serious  step  was  in  the 
year  5 17  taken  in  this  direction  by  Pope  Hormisdas, 
when  he  allayed  the  Acacian  schism,  and  prescribed 
to  the  Oriental  prelates  a  formulary,  to  wit,  that 
all  bishops  were  bound  to  submit  to  the  decisions 
of  the  Roman  See,^°  a  formulary  which,  signed  in 
the  reigns  of  the  Emperors  Justin  I.  and  Justinian, 
was  often  afterwards  used,  which  in  ZGj  was  com- 
municated to  his  legates  by  Pope  Nicholas  I.,  and 
in  869  again  subscribed  by  the  bishops  in  the  eighth 
QEcumenical  Council.  The  copy,  signed  by  the 
Byzantine  patriarch  Mennas,    runs   as   follows  :^^ 

^  Passaglia  speaks  fully  de  Prserogativis  B.  Petri,  L.  ii.,  c.  8.  seq.  ; 
p.  485,  seq.     Phillips's  Canon  Law,  §  14,  p.  98,  et  seq. 

^^  Liber.  Sacram.  Leonis,  p.  40,  41,  ed.  Bailer.  Qui  secundum 
promissionis  tuae  ineffabile  constitutum  apostolicae  confessioni 
superna  dispensatione  largiris,  ut  in  veritatis  tuae  fundamine  solidata 
nulla  mortiferae  falsitatis  jura  proevaleant  .  .  .  ipsaque  sit 
sacri  corporis  ubique  vera  compago,  quae  te  dispensante,  devota 
obsequitur,  qtiidquid  Sedes  ilia  censnerit,  qiiarn  teuere  vohiisti  totius 
ecclesiae  principatian. 

^°  Mansi,  viii.  451,  xvi.  316,  Bennettis,  P.  ii.,  t.  v.,  p.  198,  et  seq. 
The  Defensio  declar.  Cleri  Gall.  P.  iii.  L.  x.  c.  vii.  recognises  the 
long-prevailing  use  of  the  formulary,  which  is  still  found  in  many 
manuscripts. — Card.  Pitra  Jur.  eccl.  Groec.  hist,  et  monum.,  t.  i., 
p.  xl.,  seq.,  t.  ii.,  p.  iv.,  seq. 

^^  Pitra,  t.  ii.,  p.  217,  seq. 

E 


66     The  Doctrine  of  Papal  Infallibility. 

— "  The  first  principle  of  salvation  is  to  preserve 
the  rule  of  true  faith,  and  in  nowise  to  deviate 
from  the  tradition  of  the  Fathers.  For  the  sen- 
tence of  the  Lord  cannot  be  disregarded,  who  hath 
said,  "  TJiojL  art  Peter,  and  on  this  roek  will  I  build 
my  Chitrch!*  This  sentence  has  been  proved  by 
facts,  for  in  the  Apostolic  See  the  Catholic  religion 
is  ever  preserved  inviolate,^''  After  the  mention 
of  CEcumenical  Councils,  of  all  the  dogmatic 
letters  of  Leo  the  Great,  and  after  a  short  state- 
ment of  the  doctrine  of  the  Incarnation,  as  well 
as  an  enumeration  of  the  heretics  condemned, 
this  formulary  goes  on  further  to  declare  :  "  In  all 
thijigs  following  the  Apostolic  See,  we  announce 
what  has  been  ordained  by  it."  In  many  copies  it 
is  even  said  :  "  I  hope  to  be  worthy  to  be  in  that 
one  communion  with  you,  which  the  Apostolic  See 
enjoins,  in  which  is  the  perfect  and  true  solidity  of 
the  Christian  religion  ;  promising  also  that  the 
names  of  those  who  are  separated  from  the  com- 
munion of  the  Catholic  Church,  that  is,  those  who 
are  not  united  in  mind  with  the  Apostolic  See,  shall 
not  be  recited  in  the  Holy  Mysteries." 

The  Emperor  Justinian,  who  had  already  said 
to  Pope  Hormisdas,  "  We  hold  that  to  be  truly 
Catholic  which  has  been  made  known  to  us  by 
your  venerable  response,"  ^^  who  solicited  of  Pope 
John  IL,  a  confirmation  of  his  own  theological 
decree, ^"^    renewed     before    Pope     Agapetus    the 

^^  Compare  with  this  Iren.  adv.  haer.  iii.  3,  2  :  In  quo  semper  ab 
his,  qui  sunt  undique,  conservata  est  ea,  quae  est  ab  apostolis  tradi- 
tio ;  as  well  as  Cyprian's  expressions  upon  the  Roman  Church,  as  ec- 
clesioe  catholicae  radix  et  matrix  (ep.  48,  al.  45,  Constant.,  p.  132,) 
as  Petri  cathedra,  ecclesia  principalis,  unde  unitas  sacerdotalis  ex- 
orta  est.  .  .  ad  quos  (Romanos)  perfidia  non  possit  habere  acces- 
sum  (ep.  59,  al.  55  Const.,  p.  184,  185.) 

^3  Mansi.  viii.  484. 

^*  L.  7,  8,  cod.  i.,  I  de  summa  Trinitate. 


The  Doctrine  of  Papal  Infallibility.     67 

above-mentioned  Formular)^  with  the  addition, 
**  that  he  would  bind  all  to  the  like  obedience."  ^^ 
The  judgment  of  Rome  was  so  decidedly  held  up 
as  final,  that  already  Augustine  declared  "Rome 
hath  spoken  ;  the  cause  is  ended  " — "  Roma  locuta 
est ;  causa  finita  est/'  ^^  Even  the  learned  Greek 
exegetist,  Theodoret,  wrote  to  the  Roman  priest 
Renatus,  as  follows  :  "  This  most  holy  See  has 
preserved  the  supremacy  over  all  Churches  on  the 
earth,  for  one  especial  reason  among  many  others  ; 
to  wit,  that  it  has  remained  intact  from  the  defile- 
ment of  heresy.  No  one  has  ever  sat  on  that  Chair, 
who  has  taught  heretical  doctrine  ;  rather  that  See 
has  ever  preserved  unstained  the  Apostolic  grace. "^^ 
The  supervision  and  the  magisterium  in  matters  of 
faith,  the  Emperor  Marcian  also  attributed  to  the 
Pope.^^   And  St  Peter  Chrysologus  wrote  to  Euty- 

^  Pitra,  t.  ii.,  p.  219. 

^•^  These  celebrated  words  Janus  (p.  70,  seq^  vainly  strives  to 
distort.  The  question  was  not  whether  the  heretics  had  completely 
submitted, — a  submission  which  they  did  not  evince  even  to  the 
General  Council ;  but  whether  Augustine,  in  the  Papal  Confirmation 
of  the  African  synodal  decrees,  found  the  final  judgment  on  the  Pela- 
gian heresy.  He  expressed  the  wish  :  "  Utinam  aliquando  finiatur 
error  ;"  it  was  not  the  former  thing,  but  the  latter,  which  was  the 
object  of  his  desire.  With  the  words  in  the  serm.  131,  al.  2  de  verb, 
apost.,  others  are  to  be  compared  : — 

Op.  imperf.  c.  ful.  L.  II.,  resp.  ad  q.  103  :  quid  adhuc  quaeris  ex- 
amen,  quod  jam  factum  est  apud  Apostolicam  Sedem  ?  Damnata  ergo 
hseresis  non  adhuc  Episcopis  Examinanda,  sed  coercenda  est  a  po- 
testatibus  christianis.  L.  II.  ad  Bonif.  c.  3  :  Literis  b.  m.  Papge 
Innocentii  de  hac  re  tota  dubitatio  sublata  est.  Ep.  157  ad  Optat  : 
In  verbis  Apostolicoe  Sedis  tam  antiqua  atque  fundata,  certa  ac 
clara  est  fides  catholica,  ut  nefas  sit  dubitare  catholicis  Christianis. 
The  usual  objections  are  refuted  by  Bennettis,  P.  i.,  t.  ii.,  p.  309, 
seq. 

Ö7  Theodoret  ep.  116.  p.  1324,  seq. 

^^  Ep.  73  inter  ep.  P.  Leonis  :  sanctitatem  tuam  principatum  in 
episcopatu  divine  fidei  possidentem.  In  Greek  :  tt]v  cr-qv  äyLua-vmrjv 
iiTLcrKOTrevovaav  Kai  äpxovaau  ttjs  deias  Trt'crrews.  Cf.  Leo  ep.  5  c.  2.; 
Qui  Dominus  beatissimo  apostolo  Petro  primatum  fidei  sua  remu- 
neratione  commisit. 


68      The  Doctrine  of  Papal  Infallibility. 

ches  :  "  The  blessed  Peter  livetli  on  his  Chair,  and 
there  presides,  and  giveth  to  those  who  seek  it  the 
truth  of  faith. "^^  And  in  despite  of  such  testi- 
monies, to  which  many  others  might  be  annexed, 
we  are  told  it  was  the  Pseudo-Isidore,  who  first 
prepared  the  soil  for  the  growth  of  the  doctrine  of 
Papal  Infallibility  ! ! 

Pope  Pelagius  I.,  indeed  (p.  73),  asserted  his 
orthodoxy,  without  appealing  to  the  fact,  that  the 
Bishops  of  Rome  had  the  privilege  of  inerrancy. 
But  the  reason  was  that,  personally  suspected  of 
favouring  false  doctrines,  he  was  obliged  to  make 
before  others  a  personal  justification,  and  indeed 
in  reference  to  his  conduct  before  his  accession 
to  the  Papacy,  which  had  been  the  immediate 
occasion  of  these  attacks. ^°  "  But  often  and  ear- 
nestly as  the  Popes  exhorted  separated  bishops 
and  churches  to  return  to  communion  with  Rome, 
they  never  appealed  to  any  peculiar  authority, 
or  exemption  from  error  in  the  Roman  See" 
(p.  73).  Surely  such  an  appeal  to  heretics  and 
schismatics  would  have  been  unfitting  and  idle  ; 
however  necessary,  on  the  other  hand,  to  prove  the 
nullity  of  their  grounds  of  separation.  But  often, 
especially  when  without  the  guilt  of  heresy  ecclesi- 
astical obedience  was  withheld,  have  the  Popes 
appealed  to  the  pre-eminent  authority  of  St  Peter, 
as  occurred  particularly  in  the  Acacian  controversy. 
For  such  an  appeal,  the  epistles  of  Pope  Gelasius  and 
the  formulary  of  Hormisdas  are  sufficient  proofs.^' 
Pelagius  I.  says  of  the  western  bishops  who  resisted 
the  fifth  General  Council,  that  they  ought  to  have 


^  Ep.  ad  Eutych.  inter  Leon.  Epp.  n.  25. 

"  Bennettis,  P.  xi.,  t.  v.,  art.  xi.,  p.  237.  Cf.  Hefele  Cone,  ii,  p. 
887,  et  seq. 

7^  Gelas.  ep.  8,  ad  Anast.  Imp.  ;  ep.  13,  ad  Episc.  Dard.;  Com- 
monit.  ad  Faust. 


The  Doctrine  of  Papal  Infallibility.     69 

referred  their  doubts  to  the  ApostoHc  See  ;  that 
they  would  be  separated  from  the  communion  of 
the  whole  world,  if  they  omitted  in  the  Mass  the 
commemoration  of  the  Pope,  in  whom  now  rests 
the  solidity  of  the  Holy  See7^  As  Pope  Agatho, 
in  respect  to  the  Monothelites  ;  so  Gregory  II., 
against  the  eastern  Iconoclasts,  appealed  to  the 
mediatorial  position  of  the  Pope  between  East  and 
West,  as  well  as  to  Peter,  the  prince  of  the  Apos- 
tles/^ But  we  shall  elsewhere  have  occasion  to 
adduce  on  this  matter  proofs  more  numerous  still. 
As  to  the  further  grounds  against  the  doctrine  of 
Papal  Infallibility,  Janus  ever  proceeds  on  the  same 
false  assumptions,  which  have  been  already  sufifi- 
ciently  appreciated.  While  in  his  opinion,  the 
hypothesis  of  infallibility  seems  to  recommend 
itself  by  its  convenience,  by  the  facility  of  its  use, 
and  renders  Councils,  as  well  as  all  scientific  in- 
quiry, superfluous ;  it  makes  on  the  one  hand  a 
systematic  falsification  of  Church  history  abso- 
lutely requisite,  and  raises  up  on  the  other  a  wall 
of  separation  between  Catholics  and  the  separated 
religious  communities,  and  "  indeed  a  wall  the 
strongest  and  the  most  impenetrable  of  all "  (p. 
xxvii.)  What  Protestant  must  not  be  deterred  by 
the  prospect  "of  incurring  excommunication  in  this 
world,  and  everlasting  damnation  in  the  next,  when 
after  infallibility  has  been  made  into  a  dogma,  he 
should  venture  to  question  the  full  weight  and 
value  of  any  new  article  of  faith  coined  in  the 
Vatican  mint  V  (p.  47).  How  must  he  be  deterred, 
"  when  the  Pope  encroaches  on  a  quite  foreign 
domain,"  when  he  makes  decisions  "  according  to 
the  will  of  the  Jesuits,  and  of  the  bishops  acting 
under  their   guidance!"  (p.    16).      Yet   the  very 

^^  Pelag.  I.,  ep.  2,  ad  Narsei.  Patric.  Op.  6,  ad  Episc.  Tusc. 
'^  Greg.  II.,  ep.  i,  ad  Leon.  Mansi.  xii.  959,  seq. 


70     The  Doctrine  of  Papal  Infallibility. 

monstrosity  of  the  hypothesis  we  have  stated, 
seems  to  spare  the  advocates  of  Papal  Infallibility 
the  trouble  of  a  serious  refutation,  for  occasionally 
even  the  organs  of  their  opponents  cite  theological 
expressions,  which  are  calculated  in  some  degree  to 
diminish  in  their  eyes  the  terrors  of  this  bugbear/* 
That  the  matter  should  be  contemplated  from 
every  point  of  view,  Janus  now  proceeds  to  moral, 
ascetic,  and  psychological  reflections.  Under  the 
influence  of  the  idea  of  their  infallibility,  the  popes 
themselves,  in  our  author's  opinion,  become  corrupt, 
are  involved  In  the  clouds  and  fumes  of  self-conceit 
and  arrogance,  as  even  several  pontiffs  who  had 
been  earher  excellent  car(;Jinals,  became,  after  their 
elevation  to  the  Papal  throne,  totally  changed  (p. 
416).  We  question  very  much  whether  the  assump- 
tion of  infallibility  (which  can  be  regarded  only  as 
a  privilege  imparted /<?r  the  benefit  of  the  faithful,''''' 
and  not  for  the  private  advantage  of  the  Pope  for 
the  time  being,  which  exempts  the  Pope  as  little  as 
a  General  Council  from  the  obligation  of  prayer 
for  divine  assistance,  as  well  as  from  the  careful 

74  The  Allgemeine  Zeitung;  of  the  14th  of  October  1869  (No.  287), 
cites,  among  other  things  as  especially  worthy  of  notice,  the  follow- 
ing words  from  a  pastoral  letter  of  the  Prince-Bishop  of  Seckau  : — 
"  The  infallibility  of  the  Pope  by  no  means  signifies  that  in  those 
things,  which  refer  not  to  divine  revelation,  his  opinions  are  unerring  ; 
for,  in  reference  to  things  which  lie  out  of  the  sphere  of  divine  Re- 
velation, Christ  has  not  appointed  him  as  His  vicegerent,"  &c.  This 
may  sound  new  to  the  readers  of  the  "  Five  Articles  "  in  the  AUge- 
meiite  Zeitung ;  but  to  those  conversant  with  theological  literature, 
this  doctrine  is  tolerably  old. 

''^  This  is  expressed  by  Dante,  who  is  so  highly  honoured  by 
Janus  also,  in  the  following  words  of  his  "  Comedia  Divina  :  " 
"Be  ye  more  staid, 
O  Christians  !     Not  like  feather  by  each  wind 
Removable  ;  nor  think  to  cleanse  yourselves 
In  every  water.     Either  Testament, 
The  Old  and  New,  is  yours  ;  2i^^  for  your  guide. 
The  Shepherd  of  the  Chzirch.     Let  this  suffice 
To  save  you." — Paradise,  Canto  F.,  Gary's  Trans. 


The  Doctrine  of  Papal  Infallibility.     7 1 

examination  of  all  necessary  data),  leads  in  itself 
more  easily  to  pride,  than  the  other  prerogatives 
involved  in  the  Papacy,  which,  though  by  no  means 
completely  unlimited,^^  are  still  very  extensive,  and, 
for  practical  matters,  far  more  serviceable.  We 
question  whether  the  arrogance  possibly  arising 
out  of  the  possession  of  such  exalted  power,  espe- 
cially of  a  power  that  imposes  the  heaviest  burden, 
and  involves  a  fearful  responsibility  before  the 
Supreme  Judge,  can  ever  equal  the  pride  evinced  in 
the  intellectual  conceit  of  so  many  modern  scholars. 
We  question  whether,  amid  the  constant  difficulties, 
embarrassments,  and  struggles  which  the  Holy  See, 
especially  for  the  last  centuries  down  to  our  times, 
has  had  on  all  sides  to  endure,  an  old  man  seated 
on  the  chair  of  Peter,  much  tried  in  his  previous 
life,  and  now  mostly  near  the  brink  of  the  grave, 
should,  amid  the  manifestations  of  homage  paid  to 
him,  and  amid  the  **  fumes  of  incense,"  lose,  as  a 
rule,  all  sobriety  of  mind.  "  An  individual  Pope, 
we  are  told,  is  always  exposed  to  the  danger  of 
falling  under  the  influence  of  sycophants  and  in- 
triguers, and  thus  being  forced  into  giving  dogmatic 
decisions.  Advantage  is  taken  of  his  predilection 
for  some  theological  opinion,  or  for  some  religious 
order  and  its  favourite  doctrines,  or  of  his  ignorance 
of  the  history  of  dogma,  or  of  his  vanity  and  ambi- 
tion for  signalising  his  pontificate  by  a  memorable 
decision,  and  one  supposed  to  be  in  the  interest  of 
the  Roman  See,  and  thus  associating  his  name  with 
a  great  dogmatic  event,  which  may  constitute  an 
epoch  in  the  Church.  Nor  is  anything  easier  for  a 
Pope  than  to  keep  all  contradiction  at  arm's  length  : 
as  a  rule,  no  one  who  is  not  expressly  consulted, 


78  Vide  thereupon  Döllinger,  "  Church  and  Churches,"  pp.  38-44. 
Bennettis,  P.  i.,  t.  iii.,  p.  255,  seq. 


72      The  Doctrine  of  Papal  Infallibility, 

ventures  even  to  make  any  representation,  or 
suggest  any  doubts  to  him"  (p.  412,  413). 

Here,  indeed,  is  the  Pope  conceived  after  the 
type  of  a  Louis  XIV.,  or  of  a  Napoleon  I.  But  the 
history  of  the  popes  furnishes  numerous  examples, 
how  many  well-grounded  remonstrances  have  been 
brought  before  them,  and  how  many  have  found  a 
favourable  hearing.  The  instruction  for  the  fram- 
ing of  the  ordinary  ^^  relationes  status  has  a  special 
section  for  the  Postulata  and  Desiderata  of  bishops. 
In  the  granting  of  audiences,  the  popes  are  far 
more  obliging  than  other  princes,  far  more  conde- 
scending than  many  worldly  grandees,  who  are  not 
princes.  But  the  sovereign  Pontiff  is  in  the  very 
greatest  danger ! !  **  The  flattering  conviction,  so 
welcome  to  the  old  Adam,  grows  up  easily  within 
his  soul,  that  his  wishes  and  thoughts  are  divine 
inspirations,  that  he  is  under  the  special  grace  and 
guidance  of  heaven,  and  that,  by  virtue  of  his  office, 
the  fulness  of  truth  and  knowledge,  as  of  power,  is 
his  without  effort  of  his  own''  (p.  413). 

Happy,  indeed,  would  the  Pope  now  be !  He 
could  dismiss  most  of  his  functionaries,  totally 
abolish  the  '*  Cnria,"  so  odious  to  many,  save  much 
money,  and  withal  keep  more  soldiers.  Excellent 
arrangement !  Nay,  we  are  told,  "  he  will  the  more 
believe,  and  the  moi'e  quickly  catch  at  this  idea,  the 
smaller  is  his  information,  and  the  less  suspicion  or 
knowledge  he  has  of  the  doubts  and  difficulties, 
which  restrain  learned  theologians  (like  Janus,  for 
example)  from  adopting  a  particular  doctrinal 
opinion.  And  thus  even  a  well-meaning  Pope 
(how  kind  !)  may  come  to  imagine  that  he  is  far 
removed  from  all  self-exaltation,  and  is  simply  the 

^  Issued  by  Benedict  XIII.,  and  explained  by  Benedict  XIV.  in 
his  work  "De  Synodo  Dioecesana."  L.  xiii.,  c.  7,  tt seq.,  especially 
c.  13,  seq. 


The  Doctrine  of  Papal  Infallibility. 


/  o 


humble  or^an  of  tJie  Holy  Ghost,  zvho  speaks  through 
him''  (p.  413).  No  Pope  has  ever  attributed  to 
\)\'[^?>€^i inspiration,  but  divine  assistance  only  ;  but 
we  see  how  Janus  imagines  he  has  searched  the 
hearts,  and  tried  the  reins  of  popes.  "  Their  like- 
ness unto  God  "  (p.  48)  will  not  make  them  shudder 
so  much  as  it  does  Janus. 

Yet  the  latter  has  still  other  weapons  in  store  ; 
for  history  proves  to  him,  with  noon-day  evidence, 
the  very  reverse  of  the  inerrancy  of  the  popes. 


CHAPTER  V. 


ALLEGED  ERRORS  AND  CONTRADICTIONS  OF  THE 
POPES. 

T  is  no  small  undertaking  to  pronounce  upon 
questions  treated  in  many  hundreds  of 
learned  works,  a  fixed  judgment  within 
the  compass  of  a  few  lines.  But  for 
this  task,  Janus  has  mustered  sufficient  courage; 
he  arrays,  even  from  the  fourth  century,  his  argu- 
ments against  Papal  Infallibility.  Happy  are  the 
popes  of  the  first  three  centuries,  of  whom  we  pos- 
sess but  few  documents  ;  for,  from  the  less  precise 
and  definite  terminology,  which  has  already  ex- 
posed to  sharp  criticism  many  of  the  ante-Nicene 
Fathers,  these  pontiffs  would  have  hardly  escaped 
the  severest  censures.  Let  us  now  briefly  examine 
what,  on  the  part  of  the  advocates  of  Papal  Infalli- 
bility, may  possibly  be  alleged  against  the  ex- 
amples adduced. 

I.  ''Pope  Julius  I.  pronounced  Marcellus,  of  An- 
cyra,  an  avowed  Sabellian,  orthodox  at  his  Roman 
synod"  (p.  6S).  Not  only  Pope  Julius  had  done 
this,  but  the  Council  of  Sardica  also.  Marcellus 
had  waited  in  Rome  for  his  accusers  a  year  and 
three  months.^  When  these  did  not  appear,  and 
his  confession  of  faith  appeared  satisfactory,  Pope 
Julius  acquitted  him.     On  the  doctrine  of  Mar- 

'  Ep.  ad  Jul.,  p.  392,  Coustant. 


Alleged  Erj^ors,  etc.  75 

cellus,  opinions  still  differ.  Natalis  Alexander, 
Montfaucon,  and  Mohler  have  defended  his  ortho- 
doxy ;  and  Hefele  remarks,  that  it  is  difficult  to 
pronounce  a  decisive  judgment  upon  him."  Yet  it 
must  be  admitted  that  recent  research  seems  less 
favourable  to  his  orthodoxy.^  But  no  infallibilist 
has  ever  asserted,  nor  any  fallibilist  proved,  that 
the  sentence  of  Julius  was  a  doctrinal  decision,  or 
that  this  Pope  sanctioned  any  dogma.  In  a  judg- 
ment upon  the  sentiincnis  of  aji  individuaL,  the 
Pope,  no  less  than  a  General  Council,  can,  accord- 
ing to  the  most  rigid  upholders  of  infallibility,  fall 
into  an  error  of  fact  {error  facti), 

2.  "  Liberius  purchased  his  return  from  exile 
from  the  emperor  by  condemning  Athanasius,  and 
subscribing  an  Arian  creed  "  (p.  6Z). 

The  advocate  of  infallibility  can  reply,  the  fall 
of  this  Pope  into  Arianism  is  by  no  means 
certain,  nay,  subject  to  grave  doubts,  and,  if  cer- 
tain, so  not  the  result  of  full  free-will  ;  for  the 
fear  of  the  Emperor  Constantius  was  the  motive  ; 
and  still  less  in  this  fall  was  a  definition  of  faith  in- 
volved/ Many  authors,  like  Socrates,  Theodoret, 
and  Sulpicius  Severus  testify  in  favour  of  Liberius. 
Of  the  testimonies  brought  against  him,  several  are 
evidently  spurious,^  and  even  if  they  were  genuine, 


^  "  Concil.  Geschichte,"  vol.  i.,  p,  456, — \^^  Hist,  of  Councils  "^ 

'^  According  to  the  investigations  of  Dorner,  Döllinger,  Hefele, 
and  Th.  Zahn.     See  the  latter's  Marcelliis  of  Ancyra,  Gotha,  1867. 

^  Liberii  lapsus  non  certus,  nee  si  certus,  voluntarius,  nee  in 
definitione  fidei.  P.  Ballerini  de  vi  ac  ratione  primatüs,  c.  15,  §  13, 
n.  30,  p,  297,  299,  300. 

^  The  fifth  Fragment  of  Hilary  is,  according  to  Hefele,  spurious  ; 
(Concil.,  vol.  I,  p.  605,  et  seq.),  but,  according  to  Reinkens,  it  is 
genuine  (Hilarius,  p.  216,  seq.)  Even  Mr  Renouf  sees  himself  forced 
to  give  up  a  portion  at  least  of  the  Fragment ;  for  the  maintenance 
of  it  would  have  involved  him  in  the  most  flagrant  self-contradiction. 
( r/ßV  "  The  Condemnation  of  Pope  Honorius,"  London,  1868,  p. 
41,  seq.  note.) 


76  Alleged  Errors  and 

they  would  show  only  a  semi-Arlan  Catholicizing 
formula,  but  not ''  an  Arian  creed."  Liberius  can 
be  accused,  not  of  what  he  did,  but  of  what  he 
omitted  to  do  ;  he  can,  from  a  moral  point  of  view, 
be  blamed  for  his  silence,  for  his  weakness,  while 
the  dogmatic  purity  of  his  faith  remains  intact.^  If 
now  we  are  further  told,  '*  that  this  apostasy  of 
Liberius  sufficed,  through  the  whole  of  the  Middle 
Ages,  for  a  proof  that  popes  could  fall  into  heresy 
as  well  as  other  people;"  so  we  reply,  that  it  is 
perfectly  well  established,  that  in  those  ages  the 
doctrine  of  Papal  Infallibility  was  the  prevalent 
one  ;  while  in  this  passage,  on  the  other  hand,  we 
find  the  explanation,  that  inerrancy  is  to  be  ascribed 
only  to  the  formal  dogmatic  decisions  of  the  Pope, 
as  father  and  teacher  of  all  Christians,  and  which 
are  alone  binding  on  the  whole  Church,  and  not  to 
his  other  measures  and  acts. 

3.  "  Innocent  I.  and  Gelasius  I.  declared  it  to  be 
so  indispensable  for  infants  to  receive  communion, 
that  those  who  die  without  it  go  straight  to  hell. 
A  thousand  years  later  the  Council  of  Trent  ana- 
thematized this  doctrine."  ^ 

On  the  6th  of  June  1562,  the  question  whether 
by  the  Divine  Law  the  Blessed  Eucharist  was  to 
be  administered  to  children  before  the  use  of  reason, 
was  submitted,  amongst  others,  to  the  theologians 
of  the  Council  of  Trent,  and  the  Council  maturely 
weighed  the  passages  of  the  Fathers  concerning  it, 
and,  in  particular,  the  words  of  Pope  Innocent.^ 
The   words  of  Innocent  on   the   subject,   exactly 

^  Hagemann  in  the  Journal  of  Theol.  Literature  of  Bonn,  1869, 
No.  3,  p.  79-81. 

7  A  like  observation  is  made  in  a  pamphlet  which  is  in  manifold 
accordance  with  Janus,  "The  Roman  Congregation  of  the  Index, 
and  its  Working,"  Munich  1863,  p.  26. 

•  Pallavic  Hist,  Council,  Trident.  Lxvii.  c.  i,  n.  i,  c.  6,  n.  12,  c.  12, 
n.   5,  seq. 


Contradictions  of  the  Popes. 


/  / 


agree  with  the  conclusion  drawn  by  St  Augustine, 
who  argued  thus  against  the  Pelagians :  ''No  one  can 
attain  everlasting  life  without  being  a  partaker  of 
the  body  and  blood  of  Christ  ;  but  none  can  thus 
participate  without  baptism  ;  therefore  no  one  can 
obtain  eternal  life  without  baptism."^  The  refer- 
ence to  the  text  (vi.  54)  does  not  necessarily  imply 
actual  communion,  for  St  Augustine  often  explains 
this  passage  in  a  wide  sense  ;'°  but  it  was  fully  jus- 
tified with  reference  to  the  practice  which  obtained 
at  that  time,  and  far  into  the  Middle  Ages,  of  giv- 
ing communion  to  infants  ;  a  practice  which  im- 
plied baptism  as  a  previous  condition.  The  words 
of  Innocent  are  directed  in  exactly  the  same  way 
against  the  doctrine  of  the  Pelagians,  that  it  is 
possible  to  obtain  eternal  life  without  baptism  ; 
and  in  the  same  way  he  bases  his  argument  on 
John  vi.  54.  Directly  he  asserts  only  the  necessity 
of  baptism  ;"  the  precise  proposition  asserted, 
and  not  the  ratio  addita,  is  authoritative.'^  The 
same  remarks  apply  to  Gelasius'^  and  others. 
The  Council  of  Trent  defends  the  Holy  Fathers, 
who  had  3.probabilis  causa  for  acting  according  to 
the  practice  of  their  time,  and  is  very  far  from 
condemning  any  one  of  them. ''^* 

4.  ''That  Pope  Zosimus  spoke  on  the  Pelagian 
doctrines  in  a  very  different  fashion  from  his  im- 
mediate predecessor,  Innocent  "  (p.  70),  is  utterly 

9  Aug.  de  peccat.  mer.  et  rem,,  iii.  4.  Cf.  i.  20.  Op.  imperf., 
ii.  29.     Tract.  26  in  John. 

10  Noris.  Vindic.  Aug.,  §  4.  Bona  Liturg.,  ii.  19.  Natal.  Alex. 
H.  E.     Saec.  V.,  cap.  IV.,  a.  3,  §  10,  n.  7. 

"  Pallav.  1.  c,  n.  9,  upon  Innoc,  i.  ep.  26  ad  PP.    Milev.  Aug., 

ep.  93- 

12  Melch.  Canus  de  loc.  theol.  v.,  §.     Nonne  igitur. 

^3  Gelas.  ep.  ad  Episc.  per  Picenum  constitutos. 

^*  Sess.  xxi.,  cap.  4,  de  commun.  coll.  can.  4. 

*  The  translation  of  this  passage  was  given  in  the  Tablet,  and  as 
it  was  a  very  good  one,  it  has  been  retained. — Tr. 


7 8  Alleged  Errors  and 

false.  Innocent  had  decided  the  dogmatic  ques- 
tion, but  not  the  personal  one  relating  to  the 
orthodoxy  of  Cselestius.  The  latter  represented 
himself  to  Zosimus  as  perfectly  orthodox,  and 
obtained  from  him  a  mild  treatment ;  as  indeed 
Innocent  had,  in  the  case  of  his  repentance,  held 
out  to  him  the  same  prospect;  so  that  though  for 
a  time  he  deceived  the  pontiff,  he  never  at  least 
received  any  sort  of  sanction  to  his  errors,  which 
were  afterwards  fully  discovered.  So  even  Augus- 
tine, the  most  decided  adversary  of  Pelagianism, 
regarded  the  matter.""^  But  it  was  the  Tractoria 
of  Pope  Zosimus  which  on  all  points  settled  the 
controversy.  That  document,  as  a  doctrinal  deci- 
sion, was  laid  before  the  bishops  for  their  subscrip- 
tion, and  spread  over  the  whole  of  Christendom.'^ 
The  eighteen  prelates  who  did  not  sign  it,  were 
deposed  and  banished.'^ 

5.  As  regards  Pope  Vigilius,  he  by  no  means 
contradicted  himself  three  times  in  a  matter  of  faith 
(p.  72).  The  reprehensible  character  of  the  pro- 
positions favouring  Nestorianism,  put  forth  by 
Theodore  of  Mopsuestia,  as  well  as  of  the  expres- 
sions of  Theodoret  and  Ibas  in  reference  thereto, 
was  not  denied  by  this  pontiff,  but  only  the  oppor- 
tuneness and  the  justice  of  a  condemnation  of  their 
persons.  The  positive  dogmatic  purport  of  the 
judicatum,  of  the  constitutum,  and  of  his  last  decree, 
is  not  involved  in  contradiction.'^     The  reproach 

^^  Aug.  L.  ii.  contra  duas  epist.  Pelag.  ad  Bonif.,  c.  3,  seq. ; 
quidquid  interea  lenius  actum  est  cum  Coelestio,  servata  dumtaxat 
antiquissimse  et  robustissimse  fidei  firmitate,  correctionis  fuit  cle- 
mentissima  suasio,  non  approbatio  exitiosissim^e  pravitatis. 

^^  Marius  Mercator  Com.,  p.  138,  ed.  Ealuz. 

^^  The  Dominican,  B.  de  Rubeis,  in  his  treatise,  "De  peccato 
originali,"  cap.  9,  seq.^  treats  this  question  most  solidly,  and  from 
the  original  sources. 

^^  Ddllinger,  Manual  of  Eccles.  Hist.,  i.  p.  I49. 


Contradictions  of  the  Popes.  79 

which  Vigilius  incurred  is  that  of  vacillation  of  con- 
duct in  a  position  of  unexampled  difficulty,  of 
which  nothing  is  here  told  to  the  reader  ;  and  even 
against  this  charge  many  theologians,  including 
Frenchmen,  have  not  failed  to  defend  him.  The 
schism  in  the  West  was  not  his  fault.  The  East 
and  the  West,  as  often  happened  on  other  occa- 
sions, were  then  opposed  to  each  other  ;  and  it  is 
precisely  the  history  of  the  dispute  of  the  three 
chapters,  which  shows  how  necessary  was  the  de- 
cision of  the  Pope/^ 

6.  Naturally  the  case  of  Honorius  is  not  passed 
over  in  silence.  This  pontiff,  we  are  told,  expressed 
himself  in  dogmatic  epistles  quite  in  favour  of  the 
Monothelite  heresy  (p.  74)  ;  and  these  epistles  were 
in  the  sixth  CEcumenical  Council  committed,  as 
heretical,  to  the  flames  (p.  74).  The  almost  im- 
measurable Hterature  respecting  Honorius  is  here 
in  a  manner  sufficiently  arbitrary,  compressed  into 
a  few  sentences  ;  and  the  present  state  of  histori- 
cal research  on  the  subject  is  utterly  ignored. 
Hereupon  Mr  Hagemann  observes,  that  after  the 
new  and  manifold  investigations  (to  which  DoUin- 
ger  and  Hefele  have  led  the  way)  by  the  journal 
the  Katholik,  1863,  by  Schneeman  (in  his  ''  Studies 
on  the  Honorius  Question,"  1864),  by  Rump  (in 
the  German  edition  of  Rohrbacher's  "  History  of 
the  Church,"  vol.  x.,  p.  121-47),  by  Reinerding  (in 
his  ''  Contributions  to  the  Question  of  Liberius  and 
Honorius,''  1865),  the  judgment  on  Honorius  has 
ever  assumed  a  more  favourable  form.  The  unskil- 
ful defence  of  Bamberger  has  alone  been  prejudi- 

^9  Ludov.  Thomassin.  Diss.  xix.  in  Concil.,  p.  621,  seq.  Petrus 
de  Marca  Diss,  de  Vigilio.  Cf.  Card.  Orsi,  Storia,  L.  41,  n.  84. 
Ballerini  de  vi  ac  ratione  primatüs,  c.  15,  n.  39.  p.  313.  Bennettis 
Privileg.  Rom.  Pontif.  Vindic,  P.  II.,  torn.  v.  Append.,  §  v.,  p. 
625,  seq.     P.  I.,  torn,  i.,  art.  ii.,  §  3,  p.  189-204. 


8o  Alleged  Errors  and 

cial  to  the  cause."""  The  same  reviewer  observes, 
"  it  is,  above  all,  necessary  to  examine  the  first 
epistle  of  Honorius  in  itself,  in  its  doctrinal  pur- 
port, and  quite  independently  of  its  historical  con- 
nexion, just  as  if  the  Monothelite  heresy  had  never 
existed.  We  doubt  not  that  to  a  really  unpre- 
judiced mind  the  innocence  of  Honorius  would  be 
apparent,  and  the  offensive  expression,  ev  dekrj^a, 
one  will  be  from  the  context  referred  to  the  moral 
tuiity  of  the  divine  and  the  human  will  in  Christ." 
In  fact,  the  arguments  of  Schneemann,  who  com- 
pares the  expressions  of  the  Pope  with  passages  of 
St  Augustine,  which  he  had  before  his  eyes,^'  have 
nowhere  yet  been  refuted  ;  and  in  the  import  of 
their  words,  these  letters,  which  appear  as  epistolce 
privatce,  and  not  as  epistolce  doginaticce^'^  are  free 
from  heresy.^^  Thus  much  only  is  clear,  the  crafty 
Byzantine,  Sergius,  put  the  unsuspecting  Pope  on 
a  false  scent,  and  elicited  from  him  a  letter,  which 
he  was  enabled  to  misuse  for  his  own  purpose,  and 
indeed  in  favour  of  a  heresy  advocated  by  himself, 
but  then  totally  unknown  to  the  pontiff.  These 
expectations  were  crowned  with  success.  The 
expressions  of  Honorius,  as  could  not  fail  to 
happen,  were  set  up  by  the  Greeks  in  connexion 
with  the  question  then  so  warmly  agitated  ;  and 
so,  as  the  Byzantines  required,  to  whom  the  con- 
demnation of  so  many  of  their  patriarchs  was 
excessively  irksome  and  displeasing,  ensued  the 
condemnation  of  Honorius,  defended  and  praised 

'"  Journal  of  Theological  Literature.  Bonn,  ist  February  1869. 
No.  3,  p.  76. 

21  In  the  already  cited  "Studies  on  the  question  of  Honorius," 
especially  p.  48,  seq.     Freiburg,  1864. 

2^  Natal,  Alex.  H.  E.  Saec.  vii.,  Diss,  ii.,  prop.  i.  Hefele  Cone, 
ii.,  p.  284. 

2=*  Rump  in  Rohrbacher's  Church  Hist.,  vol.  x.,  p.  134,  seq.  p. 
146  (Germ,  trans.) 


Contradictions  of  the  Popes,  8 1 

as  he  had  been  by  St  Maximus.  "  That  the  Papal 
legates,"  continues  Hagemann,  "  did  not  oppose 
this  decree,  as  in  the  case  of  the  interpolated  epistle 
of  Pope  Vigilius,  may  have  had  its  ground  therein, 
that  without  the  anathema  laid  on  Honorius,  the 
Council  could  scarcely  have  been  brought  to  a  suc- 
cessful termination."  On  the  other  hand,  we  must 
set  by  the  side  of  the  CounciFs  sentence  the  letter 
of  coiifirinatio7i  of  Pope  Leo  IL;  and  however  we 
may  explain  the  Pontiff's  words,  more  we  camiot 
extort  from  them,  than  that  the  anathema  punished 
a  forgetfulness  of  duty,  rather  than  a  moral  com- 
phcity  in  the  Monothelite  errors.^'^  This  has  been 
the  view  hitherto  taken  by  the  most  distinguished 
theologians,  and  among  others,  by  many  doctors  of 
the  Sorbonne,  to  wit,  that  Honorius  was  not  a  heretic, 
but  only  a  favourer  of  heresy,^^  or  that  he  was  con- 
demned for  an  error  as  to  fact,  errore  factV^  That 
Bishop  d'Argentre  and  Archbishop  Fenelon  were 
wrongfully  alleged  to  have  denied  the  orthodoxy 
of  this  Pope,  has  long  since  been  shown. ^^  Less 
known  is  the  judgment  of  the  Sorbonne  doctor, 
royal  counsellor,  and  bishop,  Isaac  Habert.^^     The 

^  Loc.  cit.,  p.  77. 

2^  Petrus  Ballerini  loc.  cit.,  pp.  306,  307 ;  damnatus  a  sexta  Synodo 
non  ob  hseresin,  sed  quia  improvida  dispensatione  et  nonnullis 
minus  cautis  locutionibus  haeresi  favorem  impendisse  visus  est.,  pp. 
306,  307,  not.  Prsescriptum  ab  eo  silentium,  non  fuit  definitio  fidei. 
The  Gallican  Natalis  Alexander  (HE.  Ssec.  vii.,  Diss,  ii,,  prop. 
2,  3)  says  Honorius  is  acquitted  of  the  charge  of  heresy  tatn  vere 
quam  pie,  and  appeals  against  his  accusers  to  Combefis  and  Gamier. 
Cf.  also  Lud.  Thomassin.,  Dissert,  in  Cone,  Diss,  xx.,  n.  iZ,  seq. 
Bennettis  loc.  cit.,  vol.  vi,,  pp.  655-686. 

^  L.  Cozza  Hist.  Polem.  de  Groecorum  Schismate.  Romce,  1719, 
P.  ii.,  c.  17,  p.  339. 

^^  Schneeman  loc.  cit.,  pp.  31-33.' 

28  'ApxtepariKÖu.  Liber  Pontificalis  Ecclesise  Graeccenunc  primum 
ex  Reg.  MSS.  Collectus  Meditatione  et  labore  Is.  Haberti  Ep. 
Vabrensis.     Paris,  1676,  p.  565,  seq. 

F 


82  Alleged  Errors  and 

latter  observes,  it  is  not  surprising  that  the  name 
of  Honorius  also  should  not  be  wanting  in  the  for- 
mulary of  enthronization  of  the  Greek  patriarch/^ 
for  even  in  the  Roman  edition  of  the  "  Acts  of  the 
Sixth  General  Council"  {ea  fides  extitit  et  candor)  it 
occurs,  first  in  the  thirteenth  article,  where  the 
letter  of  Honorius,  because  misunderstood,  is  con- 
demned ;  and  again  in  the  eighteenth  article  his 
name  occurs. 

Habert  cites  the  documentary  evidence  for  the 
condemnation  of  Honorius  down  to  the  times  of 
Pope  Hadrian  U.,  rejects  the  hypothesis  of  the 
falsification  of  the  Acts  of  the  Sixth  Council,  and 
explains  the  sentence  in  question  as  arising  from  an 
error  as  to  fact,  which  even  an  CEcumenical  Synod 
is  liable  to.^°  He  points  out  especially,  first,  that 
the  letters  of  Honorius  were  private  letters,  and 
not  synodical  epistles,  the  then  usual  form  of 
solemn  decrees,  and  such  as  Pope  Agatho  after- 
wards issued  ;  secondly,  that  those  epistles  con- 
tain nothing  heretical ;  and  thirdly,  that  Pope 
Agatho  does  not  name  Honorius  among  the  here- 
tics, and  that  Maximus,  the  most  decided  opponent 
of  Monothelitism,  regards  him  and  his  expressions 
as  perfectly  orthodox,  knowing  as  he  did  the  asser- 
tions of  Pyrrhus,  and  of  his  fellow-sectaries.  The 
defenders  of  this  Pope  may,  in  fact,  consider  it  a 
great  triumph  for  their  cause  that,  in  despite  of  all 
the  array  of  learning  and  critical  acumen  brought 
to  bear  against  their  opinion,  they  have  not  yet 
been  refuted  ;  still  less  has  the  adverse  sentiment 
been  raised  to  the  fulness  of  evidence ;  nay,  that 


29  lUd.,  pp.  557-559- 

=*"  P.  566,     Hsec  omnia  tarnen  ex  errore  facti  orta  sunt,  qui  certe 
at  in  synodos  oecumenicas  cadere  potest. 


Contradictions  of  the  Popes,  83 

deeper  historical  inquiries  serve  ever  to  establish 
their  belief  on  a  more  solid  basis, 

7.  Passing  over  the  accusations  against  Gregory 
II.  and  Gregory  III.,  which  have  long  met  with 
their  just  appreciation,^'  Janus  passes  to  Pope 
Stephen  II.,  who  reigned  from  752  to  757,  and 
who,  according  to  him,  issued  two  untenable  dog- 
matic answers^^  (p.  54).  But  in  one  of  these  the 
question  is  not  about  the  dissolution  of  the  mar- 
riageof  a  slave  girl,butabouttheexpulsionof  aslave 
girl  living  in  concubinage  ;  and  this  decision  was 
quite  in  conformity  with  one  made  by  Leo  the 
Great.^^  In  the  other  answer  the  matter  imme- 
diately in  hand  regarded  the  piinisJiment  of  the 
priest  who,  in  a  case  of  necessity,  had  administered 
baptism  with  wine.  The  text,  moreover,  is  cor- 
rupt, and  the  genuineness  of  the  document  is  called 
in  question. ^"^ 

8.  Nicholas  I.,  we  are  told,  declared  baptism  given 
in  the  name  of  Jesus  to  be  valid.  But  the  ques- 
tion proposed  to  him  regarded  the  administrator 
of  baptism,  whether  Jew  or  heathen,  and  not  the 
form  of  the  sacrament,  whereof  Nicholas  spoke 
only  obiter,  incidentally,  and  not  ex  professo;'^'" 
and  on  this  account  many  theologians  say  he  here 
expressed  himself  only  as  a  private  doctor  (p.  405). 

31  The  above-cited  pamphlet  on  the  Congregation  of  the  Index 
treats  of  both  these  Papal  responses,  p.  25.  Compare  therewith 
Von  Moy's  Archives  for  Canon  Law.  1864  (in  German.)  Vol.  xi., 
p.  174,  seq.  Chilianeum,  vol.  iv.,  1864,  p.  254. 

32  Labbe  Cone,  vi.,  1650,  1652.     Resp.  ad.  q.  3,  11. 

33  Leo  M.  ep.  ad  Rusticum  Narbon.,  ep.  167,  c.  5,  p.  1422.  Ball., 
p.  1205,  ed.  Migne. 

34  Natal.  Alex.  Ssec.  viii.,  c,  i,  art.  6.  This  subject  is  copiously 
treated  by  Bennettis  loc.  cit.,  pp.  691-694.  Compare  also  Hefele, 
Cone,  vol.  iii.,  p.  542. 

35  Nicol.  ad  Consulta  Bulgar.,  c.  104.  S.  Alphons.  Liguori, 
Theol.  Moral.,  lib.  vi.,  n.  112. 


84  Alleged  Errors  and 

A  definitive  judgment  was  certainly  not  then  pro- 
nounced ;  and  the  opinion  in  question,  which 
occurs  in  other  writers  also,  has  never  been  termed 
heretical  by  the  many  scholars,  who  have  illus- 
trated this  passage.^^^ 

9.  The  annulling  of  orders,  and  the  reordinations, 
which  we  meet  with  from  the  end  of  the  ninth 
century  (p.  51),  prove  nothing  against  the  doctrine  of 
the  Infallibilists,  because  no  kind  of  dogmatic 
decision  is  involved  therein,  and  they  do  not  under- 
stand their  doctrine  as  Janus  interprets  it.  The 
question  was  still  for  a  long  time  undecided  ;^^ 
and  many  harsh  expressions  against  certain  orders 
are  to  be  construed  only  in  the  sense  of  illiciUiess, 
not  of  invalidity ;  for,  according  to  ancient  disci- 
pline, absolute  ordinations  were  forbidden,  and  the 
irritum  (the  null)  was  very  often  opposed  only  to  the 
ratum  (the  approved).^^  Janus  might  have  alleged 
still  more  ancient  examples  of  this  error,  even 
from  the  times  of  Innocent  I.  ;  but  these,  theolo- 
gians have  long  since  explained  and  duly  appre- 
ciated.^'^ Passages  may  be  cited  from  many  Topes 
which  seem  to  express  the  absolute  nullity  of 
orders  imparted  by  heretics,  schismatics,  Simon- 
ists,  and  the  rest;  and  other  passages  again,  as 
one,  for  instance,  from  Gregory  the  Great,'^'^  which 
presuppose  their  validity.  Stephen  VI.  (VII.) 
blindly  gave  way  to  his  passion,  but  he  passed 
no  dogmatic  decree  ;  while  John  IX.  forbade  re- 

36  Bennettis /or,  cil.,  §vii.  pp.  706-708.   Compare  my  Monography 
upon  Photius,  vol.  iii.,  p.  593,  seq. 

37  Cf.  the  Augsburg  Pastoral  Journal,  1869,  No.  42,  p.  334. 

38  These  and  other  explanations  are  set  forth  at  length  in  my  Life 
of  Photius,  vol.  ii.,  p.  321,  seq. 

3«  liennettis  loc.  cit.,  %  iv.,  pp.  53 1 -600.     Ballerini  loc.  ciL,  p.  713. 
^  Greg.  M.  L.  iii.,  ep.  15,  coll.     L.  ii.,  ep.  51,  ad  Joh.  Rav.  L. 
xi.,  ep.  67. 


Contradictions  of  the  Popes.  85 

ordinations."^^  That  in  the  eleventh  century  a  re- 
conciliatory  rite,  already  known  to  earlier  ages, 
existed  for  the  reinstallation  into  ecclesiastical 
dignities  illicitly  obtained,  is  certain.  It  is  equally 
certain  that  it  was  the  effcctus  virtiitis^  and  not 
the  forma  sacramenti,  which  was  in  many  cases 
disputed. "^^ 

10.  *'  The  Capernaite  doctrine,  already  rejected 
by  the  whole  Church,  and  contradicting  the  dogma 
of  the  impassibility  of  Christ's  body,"  was  in  a  for- 
mulary proposed  to  Berengarius,  affirmed  in  1059 
by  Pope  Nicholas  II.  (p.  55).  This  formulary, 
however  calculated  to  hold  fast  the  dexterous  and 
ever  slippery  sophist,  is  by  no  means  heretical. 
The  harsh-sounding  expressions  may  be  justified 
by  the  intimate  union  of  the  outward  sign  with  the 
body  of  Christ,  which  admits  of  a  comnumicatio 
idiomattiin,  in  the  same  way  as  the  union  of  the 
two  natures  in  Christ ;  so  that  what  outwardly 
occurs  to  the  sign  can,  in  a  certain  measure,  be 
ascribed  to  the  body  of  the  Lord  concealed  under 
it.  In  this  sense  the  Fathers,  and  among  others, 
Chrysostom,  had  already  spoken  of  a  touching  of 
the  body  of  Christ. ^^ 

11.  "  Celestine  III.  tried  to  loosen  the  marriage 
tie  by  declaring  it  dissolved  if  either  party  became 
heretical.'*'^  Innocent  III.  annulled  this  decision,"*^ 
and  Hadrian  VI.  called  Celestine  a  heretic  for 
giving  it"  (p.  54). 

But  Celestine  addressed  a  mere  rescript  to  indi- 
viduals ;  it  was  a  responstmijicris,  and  not  a  decree 
of  faith  ;  the  formula  videttcr  nobis  expresses  but  a 

^^  Mansi  Cone,  vol.  xviii.  221,  seq. 

^^  Bennettis  loc.  cit.,  especially  p.  597,  seq.,  t.  iv.,  p.  415,  seq. 
^^   Vide  Dollinger's  Manual  of  Church  Hist.,  vol.  i.,  p.  376. 
**  Cap.  Laudabilem  (iii,  33)  de  Convers.  Infid.     Cf.  Urban  III., 
cap.  6,  de  ilia  iv.  19  de  divort. 
^  Cap.  7,  quanto  iv.,  19  de  divort. 


86  Alleged  Errors  and 

private  opinion ;  and  then  this  is  brought  forward 
by  the  Pope,  not  ex  proposito,  but  only  obiter^  inci- 
dentally.'^^ If  Hadrian  VI.  called  Celestine  a 
heretic,  this  was  done  by  the  Professor  of  Utrecht, 
and  not  by  the  Pope."^^ 

12.  Innocent  III.,  "this  father  of  law,"  was,  it 
seems,  quite  ignorant  of  theology,  because  in  a 
decretal  he  declared  Deuteronomy,  as  the  second 
book  of  the  law,  binding  on  the  Christian  Church 
(p.  56).'^^  But  this  Pope,  acting  according  to  the 
taste  of  his  age,  and  the  analogy  of  Gregory  the 
Great,  sought,  by  help  of  an  allegorical  interpreta- 
tion of  Deuteronomy  (xvii.  8-12),  to  draw  motives 
of  congruity  for  his  decision,  which  had  nothing 
whatever  to  do  with  the  fifth  book  of  Moses.  To 
accuse  him  of  an  error  in  this  case  is  utterly  futile.'*^ 
In  the  official  acts  of  Popes,  as  well  as  of  Councils, 
it  is  only  the  regulative  parts  which  are  authori- 
tative, and  not  the  arguments,  nor  the  rhetorical 
adornments. ^°     As  little  can  any  error  be  shown 


*^  Bennettis  loc.  cit.,  t.  v.,  §  viii.,  p.  720,  seq.  Card.  Sfondratus 
(Gallia  Vindicata.,  Dissert,  iv.,  §  4,  n.  I,  p.  813),  therein  reminds  us 
that  Innocent  says,  "  Etsi  quidam  prasdecessores  nostri  aliter  sensisse 
videantur,"  and  that  sentire  \%  x^ot  synonymous  with  o'lf/fw/r^ ;  and 
that  Innocent  also  did  not  define,  as  the  following  words  show  : 
'■'■  Credimiis  aliter  respondendum:"  then  the  Cardinal  subjoins: 
"  Sed  parcendum  Maimburgo  solius  historise  gnaro." 

^^  Cf.  Pichler  loc.  cit.,  vol.  ii.,  pp.  681,  682.     Bennettis  loc.  cit.,  p. 

243- 

*^  C.  13  per  venerabilem,  t.  iv.  17.  Qui  filii  sint  legitimi.  This 
passage  is  likewise  cited  in  the  pamphlet  "  On  the  Congregation  of 
the  Index,"  p.  26. 

^^  A  full  investigation  of  this  subject  is  to  be  found  in  the  Augs- 
burg Postzeitung  of  the  12th  October  1869,  Append.,  No.  49, 
in  an  article  entitled  "  A  Characteristic  Specimen  of  Janus." 

^"  Berardi  Comment,  in  jus  Eccles.,  Dissert,  ii.,  c.  2  :  In  pluribus 
pontificiis  Rescriptis  nonnulla  continentur  extra  principalem  senten- 
tiam,  in  qua  una  vis  Rescripti  consistit,  quae  sunt  aut  prorsus  ex- 
tranea,  quandoque  etiam  minus  ad  rectam  rationem  exacta,  in  qui- 
bus  seil.  Capellanus  plurimum  suo  ingenio  indulsit,  iis  prsesertim 
temporibus,  quibus  aut  theologise  aut  canonum  aut  etiam  solidse 
philosophise  studia  non  satis  exculta  fuisse  non  ignoramus. 


Contradictions  of  the  Popes.  %'] 

in  what  this  Pontiff  says  respecting  the  translation 
of  bishops  (p.  55).-" 

13.  Pope  John  XXII.  stands  under  a  twofold 
accusation.  First,  with  regard  to  the  doctrine  of 
Christ's  poverty  and  the  rule  of  St  Francis,  he  was 
in  the  most  direct  opposition  to  the  decretal  of 
Nicholas  III.  (pp.  57-59).  Secondly,  he  preached  at 
Avignon  the  doctrine,  that  before  the  general  resur- 
rection the  blessed  in  heaven  are  deprived  of  the 
beatific  vision  ;  and  on  this  account  he  was  in  Paris 
accused  of  heresy  (p.  274). 

Now,  as  regards  the  first  point,  the  earlier  Galli- 
cans  found  between  Nicholas  III.^^  and  John 
XXII. ^^  no  contradiction  in  the  substance  of  their 
doctrine,  but  rather  in  their  words.^"^  The  opposi- 
tion between  them  lies,  not  in  the  sphere  of  dogma, 
but  in  different  philosophic  and  juridical  views. 
Three  questions,  namely,  come  here  under  consi- 
deration. The  first  is,  whether,  in  the  things  which 
are  consumed  by  use,  the  iisiis  can  be  severed 
from  the  dominium  or  ownership  t  The  next  is, 
whether  a  state  of  poverty,  which  excludes  every 
species  of  proprietorship,  be  meritorious  and  holy  t 
And  the  last  is,  whether  Christ  our  Lord,  by  word 
and  example,  taught  such  a  kind  of  poverty.^^  The 
first  question  Nicholas  answered  in  the  affirmative, 

^^  Vide  Phillips's  Can.  Law,  t.  v.,  §  226,  especially  page  445,  and 
seq. 

52  C.  3,  Exiit  de  V.  S.,  v.  12  in  6. 

5'  Joh.  xxii.,  Extravag.,  tit.  14,  c.  3.  Ad  Conditorem  canonum  ; 
c.  4,  cum  inter  nonnullos  ;  c.  5,  Quia  quorundam. 

5^  Natal.  Alex.  Hist.  Eccles.,  Saec.  xiii.  et  xiv.,  Dissert,  xi.,  art.  i. 
The  dissertatio  praevia  of  the  Amsterdam  edition  of  the  Defensio 
Declarationis  Cleri  Gallicani  of  the  year  1745,  has,  in  §  46:  Cete- 
rum  neque  hie  sollicite  quaerimus,  qua  de  re  prsecise  ageretur  et  an 
revera  Nicolaus  pro  cathedrae  auctoritate  ita  decreverit,  nee  magis 
curamus  hie,  rectene  an  secus  ipse  ac  Johannes  egerint  et  an  sutnniä 
cojisentiant,  verbis  litigent. 

^5  Cf.  Raynald,  anno  1322,  n.  65  ;  Bellarm.  de  Rom,  Pont.,  iv.  14. 


88  A  liege d  Errors  and 

but  John  in  the  negative  ;  and  herein  each  started 
from  a  different  philosophic  and  juridical  concep- 
tion. The  words  simplex  facti  tisus  could  not 
signify  the  use  of  another's  property  against  the 
will  of  the  owner,  for  this  would  have  been  im- 
moral, but  the  moderate  and  permitted  use, 
such  as  durante  concedentis  licentia  was  allowed  to 
the  Franciscans.^^  John  went  from  the  principle, 
the  simplex  usus  facti  ynWhowt  thejV/J  titendi  is  usus 
injustus,  and  held  strongly  to  the  opposite  opinion, 
that  whoever  is  owner  of  the  thing  can  sell,  ex- 
change, and  give  it  away,  as  he  will ;  but  this,  by 
their  rule,  is  not  permitted  to  the  Minorites.  The 
answer  to  the  first  question  determines  the  reply  to 
the  second.  Nicholas  must  give  an  affirmative 
answer,  and  John  a  negative  ;  both  herein  speaking 
according  to  their  peculiar  views  of  the  relation  of 
the  tistis  to  the  jus.  In  the  same  way  the  third 
question  may  be  answered  in  the  affirmative  or  in 
the  negative,  according  to  the  point  of  view  from 
which  it  is  regarded.  Christ  and  the  apostles 
taught  and  practised  at  times  complete  poverty, 
but  they  had  at  other  times  temporal  goods  also  ; 
they  taught  the  perfect  and  the  less  perfect.^^  Not 
more  than  Nicholas  III.^^  did  John  XXII.  wish 
to  pronounce  a  definition  in  this  matter.  He 
desired  to  resist  the  fanaticism  of  the  Spiritualists, 
and  to -oppose  real  facts  to  their  false  enthusiasm. 
Highly  as  the  rule  of  St  Francis  is  esteemed,  as 
one  sanctioned  and  recommended  by  the  Church 
for  leading  to  a  more  perfect  following  of  Christ,  it 
is  by  no  means  in  itself,  and,  rightly  explained,  a 

^^  Ballerini  de  Potest.  Eccles.  sum.  Pont,  et  Concil.  General.,  liber. 
Veronae,  1768.     Append,  de  Infall.  Pont.,  p.  277,  n.  9. 

^''  Bennettis /(?<;.  cit.,  §  viii.,  pp.  725-730. 

^^  Card.  Orsi,  t.  ii.,  de  Rom.  Pont,  auctoritate,  1.  iii.,  c  42,  p. 
268. 


Contradictions  of  the  Popes,  89 

subject  of  revelation — of  the  dcpositimi  fidei.  Ponti- 
fical decrees  that  belong  to  this  class,  are  such  only 
as  solemnly  sanction  rules  of  faith  and  of  morals 
for  the  whole  Church  ;  and,  in  the  case  before  us, 
this  can  by  no  means  be  proved. ^^ 

Secondly,  in  respect  to  the  doctrine  of  the 
Beatific  vision,  John  XXII.  merely  expressed  him- 
self by  way  of  disputation,  without  attempting  to 
frame  any  definition  on  the  matter — a  definition 
reserved  for  his  successor,  Benedict  XII.  Twenty- 
three  doctors  of  the  Paris  University  testified,  on 
the  2d  January  1333,  that  the  Pope  had  neither 
asserendo,  sen  opinando,  expressed  the  view  still 
advocated  by  the  Greeks,  and  not  yet  declared 
heretical.  Moreover,  before  his  death  the  Pontiff 
gave  a  very  satisfactory  explanation  of  his  views 
on  this  subject,  which  he  had  treated  as  a  learned 
theologian.^"" 

14.  The  decree  of  Eugenius  IV.  on  the  sacra- 
ments theologians  have  long  been  familiar  with  ; 

53  Ballerini  de  vi  ac  ratione  primatüs,  c  15,  p.  317  :  In  his  et 
similibus  decretis  potissimum  cavendum,  ne  idem  esse  credatur  ali- 
quid  pertinere  ad  niateriam  fidei,  et  decreta,  quae  a  Pontificibus 
eduntur,  ut  respondeant  interpellantibus  apostolicam  sententiam  et 
auctoritatem,  si  quo  hujus  auctoritatis  charactere  muniantur,  sem- 
per esse  definitionem  fidei.  In  re  enim,  quae  referri  queat  ad  jus 
naturale  vel  divinum,  respondere  possunt,  quod  ex  opinione  proba- 
bilius  judicant  vel  tutius,  nisi  exprimant  aliquid  credendum  aut 
damnandum  ex  Catholica  fide,  idque  possunt,  etiamsi  ad  .compes- 
cendas  acriores  contentiones  sub  excommunicationis  poena  vetent 
constitutis  glossas  addere  et  aliter  interpretari,  ut  Nicolaus  vetuit. 
Potest  enim  excommunicatio  ferri  ob  praesumptionem  et  inobedien- 
tiam,  quae  pacem  turbet  et  scandala  foveat,  tametsi  circa  articulum 
nondum  definitum  ex  Catholica  fide  nullum  laesae  fidei  periculum 
sit.  Hoc  uno  principio  quam  multae  constitutiones  Pontificum  ali- 
quem  characterem  auctoritatis  apostolicae  praeferentes  a  propria 
dictae  definitionis  fidei  catalogo  excluduntur. 

^  Buteus  Hist.  Univ.  Paris,  t.  iv.,  B.  p.  236.  Spondan.,  anno 
1334.  Raynald,  anno  1334,  nn.  27,  35.  Bennettis  loc.  cit.,  pp.  730- 
734.  Ballerini  loc.  cit.,  n.  40,  pp.313,  314-  Werner's  Hist,  of  Po- 
lemic Literature,  vol.  iii.,  p.  522,  seq. 


90  Alleged  Errors  and 

but  it  was  reserved  for  Janus  to  pronounce  It 
completely  erroneous.  The  reader  unacquainted 
with  the  text  might  almost  be  misled  into  the 
belief  that  the  Pope,  instead  of  seven,  recognized 
but  four  sacraments  of  the  Church.  But  this  is 
not  so.  The  decree  enumerates  all  our  seven 
sacraments,  and  the  omission  of  three  is  only  a 
conclusion  drawn  by  Janus.  The  decree  is  really 
a  practical  instruction  pro  faciliojd  doctrina,  and 
forms  part  of  a  great  whole,  to  which  the  Nicene 
Creed,  the  Definitions  of  Chalcedon,  and  even  a 
decree  on  festivals,  belong.  These  documents  have 
certainly  not  all  the  same  authority.^'  If  the 
tendering  of  the  vessels  is  stated  to  be  the  matter 
of  holy  orders,  this  does  not  certainly  exclude  the 
imposition  of  hands,  which  was  already  in  use 
among  the  Armenians,  and  was  prescribed  in  the 
Roman  Pontifical  also,  to  which  express  reference 
is  made.  Eugenius  spoke  of  the  integral  and 
accessory  form  and  matter,  which,  for  greater  con- 
formity with  the  Roman  Church,  the  Armenians 
were  yet  to  adopt.^^  The  form  of  Confirmation 
customary  among  the  Latins  is  briefly  stated ; 
but  it  is  not  enjoined  as  an  absolute  form.  The 
form  usual  among  the  Greeks  was  ever  acknow- 
ledged ;^^  as  was  also  the  case  with  their  form  of 


^^  This  is  even  shown  by  the  distinction  at  the  close :  Capitula, 
declarationes,  prsecepta,  etc.  Denzinger  Enchiridion  Definitionum, 
p,  20I,  ed.  iv.  It  is  not,  as  Janus  asserts  (n.  1 7),  that  "  Denzinger 
has  omitted  the  first  portion  regarding  the  doctrine  of  the  Trinity 
and  of  the  Incarnation,  in  order  to  conceal  in  some  degree  the  dog- 
matic character  of  this  celebrated  decree,"  but  in  order  not  to 
repeat  what  he  had  elsewhere  already  communicated. 

^'^  Bened.  XIV.  de  Syn.  dioeces.,  1.  viii.,  c.  lo,  n.  8.  St  Alphons. 
Liguori  Theol.  Moral.,  1.  vi.,  n.  749.  Arcud.  de  Concordia,  vi. 
5,  p.  442,  seq. 

*^2  Liguori  loc.  cit.,  n.  167-179.  Arcud.  de  Concordia,  ii.  7. 
Pignatelli  Consult.  Can.,  t.  viii.,  Cons.  78,  p.  141. 


Contradictions  of  the  Popes.  g  i 

Penance.^'^  As  this  Instruction  had  for  its  object 
to  bring  the  Armenians  as  near  as  possible  to  the 
Roman  rite  in  the  administration  of  the  sacra- 
ments, its  mode  of  speech  has  nothing  remark- 
able ;  still  less  is  it  chargeable  with  error. 

15.  What  Janus  further  says  on  these  matters 
refers  to  mere  minutiae.  The  question  "  about 
the  comma  in  the  bull  of  Pius  V.  against  Baius  " 
(p.  49),  may,  as  the  most  recent  editor  of  the  Baian 
controversies  justly  remarks,  be  considered  as 
settled.^^  Like  disputes  frequently  occur,  and  it 
argues  but  a  want  of  juridical  instruction  to 
exalt  difficulties  of  interpretation  into  a  system  of 
irreconcilable  antagonism.  Janus  dwells  at  much 
length  (pp.  62,  63),  after  the  manner  of  some  Protes- 
tants, and  of  Launoius,  on  Sixtus  the  Fifth's  edition 
of  the  Bible — a  work  in  which  that  Pontiff  evinced 
his  love  for  biblical  studies,  but  about  which  he 
passed  no  sort  of  decree.  He  promulgated  no  bull 
on  the  subject;  he  did  not  even  desire  that  his 
work  should  be  received  fide  divi?iä,  as  quite 
correct  and  perfect.^^  The  errors  in  his  edition  refer 
not  to  matters  of  faith  ;  and  neither  himself  nor 
his  successor,  Clement  VIII.,  ever  imagined,  or 
could  imagine,  it  was  in  their  power  to  put  forth  a 
perfectly  faultless  edition  of  the  Scriptures,  in 
which  posterity  would  find  nothing  to  change  for 
the  better.^^  '  The  decision  of  Pope  Alexander 
VII.,  in  the  year  1687,  "  in  favour  of  the  newly- 

^  PigTiatelli  op.  cit.,  t.  iii.,  Cons.  60  n.  23  ;  t.  vii.  Cons.  50,  n.  i, 
p.  102.  Deer.  Congr.  S.  Off.,  19  Dec.  1613.  Arcud.  loc.  cit., 
iv.  3. 

^  Linsenmann's  Michael  Baius  and  the  Foundation  of  Jan- 
senism.    Tübingen,  1867,  p.  266. 

«6  For  example,  upon  the  building-charge  of  Patrons  in  Cone. 
Trid.,  Sess.  XXI.  c.  7,  De  Ref.  Cf.  Schulte's  System  of  Can. 
Law.,  §  no,  p.  548,  in  German. 

^  BenneUis  loc.  cit.,  pp.  741-744 


92  A  lleged  Errors  and 

discovered  doctrine  of  attrition  "  (preface  xxvii.), 
is  nothing  more  than  a  prohibition  to  censure  one 
of  two  opinions  ventilated  in  the  schools.^^  The  bull 
of  Clement  XI.  against  Quesnel,^^  as  well  as  the 
decisions  of  Benedict  XIII.  and  of  earlier  Pontiffs 
against  Jansenism,  are  received  in  the  whole 
Church ;  and  against  this  universal  acceptance 
the  protest  of  a  handful  of  sectaries  counts  for 
nought.  And  I  am  at  a  loss  to  understand  how  a 
Catholic  theologian  can  say,  that  by  the  condem- 
nation of  the  Five  Propositions  of  Jansenius, 
Innocent  X.  began  a  controversy  '*  which  lasted 
for  upwards  of  a  century,  and  has  never  found  a 
solution''  (p.  414).  Janus,  with  his  friends  of  this 
school,  might  have  also  represented  Pope  Clement 
XL,  on  account  of  his  Easter  homily  in  1702,  as  an 
Eutychian.  ^Groundless  as  such  an  imputation 
would  have  been,^°  still,  it  could  not  have  failed  to 
exercise  a  great  influence  on  his  readers. 

I  have  gone  through  in  chronological  order  the 
motley,  confused  mass  of  instances  of  alleged 
Papal  contradictions  and  errors,  to  which  others  of 
equal  value  might  easily  have  been  annexed.^'  If 
our  scholar  had  solidly  refuted  all  the  exceptions 
of  the  Papal  advocates,  he  might  then  have  boasted 
of  a  service  rendered  to  learning.  But  merely  to 
copy  down,  without  almost  any  regard  to  the  rich 
treasures  of  ecclesiastical  literature  on  this  sub- 
ject, old  accusations,  is  not  to  advance  in  any  way 
either  the  interests  of  science,  or  the  interests  of 

^  Denzinger  loc.  cit.,  n.  93,  p.  322, 

^^  Ibid.,  n.  loi,  p.  351,  seq. 

''*'  Bennettis  loc.  cit.,  pp.  744-746. 

''^  For  example,  the  concession  of  Pope  Innocent  VIII.  to  the 
Norwegians  to  make  use  of  water  instead  of  wine  in  the  sacrifice  of 
the  Mass ;  Pope  Martin  the  Fifth's  pretended  dispensation  in  the 
first  degree  of  consanguinity  ;  the  sale  of  indulgences  under  Pope 
Celestine  V.  and  Boniface  IX.  See  thereupon  Benettis  loc.  cit.,  pp. 
722,  735.  738. 


Contradictions  of  the  Popes.  93 

the  Church.  It  is  only  dust  which  has  been  thrown 
in  the  eyes  of  a  pubhc  totally  unacquainted  with 
theological  works,  either  of  ancient  or  modern  times ; 
but  not  a  single  scientific  opponent  has  been  con- 
futed. 


CHAPTER  VI. 

THE   PRIMACY  AND   THE   PAPACY. 

N  the  inquiries  we  have  hitherto  made,  our 
object  has  been  merely  to  prove  that  the 
"  Infallibilists "  have  no  reason  to  fear 
the  wide  deductions  of  the  anonymous 
Janus.  Less  grounds  have  they  for  such  appre- 
hension since  our  authors  direct,  for  the  most  part, 
their  attacks  against  the  Papal  supremacy  itself^ 
quite  in  the  same  way  as  non-Catholic  contro- 
versialists have  ever  done,  and  still  do. 

For  this  assertion,  in  fact,  abundant  proofs  are 
to  be  found  in  the  book  in  question.  "  God  has 
gone  to  sleep,  because  in  His  place  His  ever- 
wakeful  and  infaUible  Vicar  on  earth  rules  as  lord 
of  the  world,  and  dispenser  of  grace  and  of  punish- 
ment. St  Paul's  saying,  '  In  Him  we  live,  move, 
and  are,'  is  transferred  to  the  Pope."  So  we  read 
at  p.  39.  "  And  many  Protestants  say  also,  Christ 
has  ceased  to  govern,  if  He  has  appointed  a  visible 
vicegerent  on  earth."'     When  we  are  further  told 

1  Cf.  the  expressions  of  a  Protestant  in  Bishop  Ketteler's  work, 
entitled  "  The  General  Council  and  its  Importance  for  our  Time  " 
(p.  122,  seq.)  Nay,  it  would  suffice  to  compare  with  Janus  quite 
ordinary  Protestant  pamphlets.  Out  of  the  vast  number  kno^^m  to 
me,  I  will  point  out  but  one,  entitled  "The  Papacy  and  Chris- 
tianity ;  or,  A  Proof  that  the  Modem  Papacy  within  the  Christian 
Church  has  no  just  foundation  :  Words  for  the  consideration  of 


The  Primacy  and  the  Papacy.  95 

(p.  64),  "  That  for  thirteen  centuries  an  incompre- 
hensible silence  on  this  fundamental  article 
(namely,  that  the  Pope  of  the  day  is  the  only 
vehicle  of  Christ's  inspiratio?is,  the  pillar  and  the 
exclusive  organ  of  divine  trnth)  reigned  throughout 
the  whole 'church  and  her  literature;  when  it  is 
added  that  none  of  the  ancient  confessions  of  faith, 
no  catechism,  none  of  the  Patristic  writings,  com- 
posed/^r  the  religions  iitstrnction  of  the  people,  con- 
tain a  syllable  about  the  Pope,  still  less  any  hint 
that  all  certainty  of  faith  and  doctrine  depends  on 
him  only." — so  we  can  only  reply,  that  this  out- 
pouring of  the  heart,  if  it  should  prove  anything 
against  the  theory  of  Papal  infallibility,  tells  equally 
against  the  doctrine  of  the  supremacy  of  the 
Roman  Pontiff,  as  defined  in  the  Union  Decree 
of  the  Council  of  Florence.  This  becomes  still 
more  apparent  when,  somewhat  later  (p.  Z'j'), 
''the  silence  of  the  ancient  Church,"  in  respect  to 
the  authority  of  the  Pope,  is  strongly  contrasted 
with  the  doctrine  of  his  plenitude  of  power  "  which 
since  the  time  of  St  Thomas  Aquinas  has  been 
adopted  in  Catholic  theology"  (p.  86).  But  this 
doctrine  all,  even  the  most  recent  dogmatic  theo- 
logians of  Germany,  have  taught,  without  being 
obliged  to  take  the  inerrancy  of  the  doctrinal  de- 
cisions of  the  Pope  as  the  basis  of  their  teaching. 
If  in  earlier  dogmatic  works  "  no  special  treatise 
or  locus''  was  assigned  to  the  article  of  Papal 
supremacy,  this  was  formerly  the  case  even  with 
the  article  on  the  Church  ;  as,  for  example,  in  the 
celebrated  work  of  St  John  Damascene,  "■  On  the 

all  Christendom,"  by  G.  A.  Wimper,  Preacher,  Bremen,  1854,  p. 
132.  There  are  here  points  of  contact  enough  with  our  Janus  ; 
but  I  must  pass  them  over.  Luther's  writing,  entitled  the  "  Baby- 
lonish Captivity,"  stands  doubtless  as  the  model  of  all  such  lucu- 
brations. 


90  The  Primacy  and  the  Papacy, 

Orthodox  Faith,"  from  which  so  many  have  since 
derived  their  materials.  But  what  conclusion  are 
we  thence  to  draw  ?  This  the  author  may  tell  us  ; 
but  we,  for  our  parts,  have  our  own  answer,  which 
we  shall  later  set  forth. 

To  this  we  may  add,  that  Janus  finds  but  very 
scanty  testimonies  for  the  supremacy  of  the  Roman 
See  in  Christian  antiquity  (p.  Z'f),  Works  in  abund- 
ance, which  fill  whole  libraries,  have  collected 
these  testimonies ;  but  for  our  author,  only  very 
few  are  in  existence.  Many  witnesses  he  entirely 
passes  over,  such  as  Optatus  of  Milevi  and  Prosper.^ 
The  testimony  of  others  he  seeks  to  reduce  to  a 
minimum,  such  as  those  of  Augustine^  and  of 
Jerome;"^  even  Ambrose   belongs  to  the  "silent 

^  See  the  testimonies  of  both  in  Bennettis  loc.  cit.,  P.  i,,  t.  ii., 
p.  297,  seq.,  p.  313,  seq. 

^  Of  Augustine  he  knows  but  one  passage  testifying  for  the  primacy 
(in  Ep.  43,  nn.  3,  7) ;  but  even  this  he  deems  not  to  carry  full  weight 
(p.  88).  But  we  may  add  to  this  many  other  passages  ;  for  example, 
(Psalm,  contra  partem  Donati)  :  Numerate  sacerdotes  vel  ab  ipsa 
Petri  sede ;  ipsa  estpetra,  quam  nojt  vincunt  inferonim  porta.  Cf. 
Ep.  53,  n,  1-3.  De  Bapt.  c.  Don,,  ii.  i  :  Quis  nescit,  ilium  apos- 
tolatus  principatum  cuilibet  episcopatui  preeferendum  ?  Distat 
cathedrarum  gratia.  L.  i.  ad  Bonif.  c.  I  (Coust.  p.  1 024)  :  Com- 
munis est  omnibus  nobis  qui  fungimur  episcopatus  officio,  specula 
pastoralis,  quamvis  ipse  in  ea  praemineas  celsiore  fastigio.  De  util. 
Cred.  c.  17  :  Romanae  ecclesise  nolle  primas  dare,  vel  summae 
profecto  impietatis  est  vel  pisecipitis  arrogantiae.  Cf.  contra,  Ep. 
Manich.,  n.  5,  and  our  fourth  chapter,  n.  66. 

*  That  Jerome  in  essentials  ranked  Cyril  of  Jerusaleni  (whom  in 
his  Chronicle  he  numbered  among  the  Arians,  and  in  his  work  De 
Script.  Ecclesiae,  c.  112,  only  very  briefly  treated  of) — "that  he 
ranked  him  as  high  as  the  Pope  "  (p.  xxv.),  is  by  no  means  proved. 
His  words  to  Pope  Damasus  are  not  so  easily  explained  away. 
Coustant.  p.  545  :  Cathedram  Petri  et  fidem  apostolico  ore  lau- 
datam  censui  consulendam  .  .  .  Profligato  sobole  mala  patri- 
monio  apudvos  solos  incorrupta  Fatrum  servatur  hcereditas.  P.  546. 
Ego  nullum  primum  nisi  Christum  sequens  beatitudini  tuce  (sc. 
Damaso)  id  est  cathedra  Petri  communione  consocior.  Super  illam 
petram  cedificatam  ecclesiam  scio  .  .  .  Quicunque  tecum  non 
colligit,  spargit,  h.  e.  qui  Christi  non  est,  Antichristi  est.  P.  547, 
n.  4  :  Decernite,  obsecro,  si  placet,  et  non  timebo  tres  hypostases 


The  Primacy  and  the  Papacy,  97 

ones,"^  as  well  as  "the  most  fertile  of  the  Greek 
Fathers,  Chrysostom."^  Many  say  nothing-  of  the 
privileges  of  the  Roman  Bishop ;  but  for  those 
familiar  with  the  mode  of  speech  in  Christian 
antiquity,  it  suffices  that  they  speak  of  the  privi- 
leges of  the  Roman  Church/ 

Yet  the  many  passages  from  the  Fathers  relating 
to  this  matter  we  will  not  here  bring  forward,  as 
they  can  be  cited  in  a  more  suitable  place.  Here 
it  will  suffice  to  remind  the  reader  of  the  words  of 
Pope  Pius  VI.,  embracing  as  they  do  almost  all 
the  testimonies  of  Christian  antiquity,  when,  in  the 
year  1786,  in  his  condemnation  of  the  work  of 
Eybel,  entitled,  "What  is  the  Pope.?"  he  pro- 
nounced them,  with  the  assent  and  the  joyous  ap- 
proval of  the  whole  Catholic  world.  "  That  on  the 
solidity  of  the  rock  the  Church  was  founded  by 
Christ,  and  by  an  especial  favour  Peter  was  chosen 
by  Him  before  the  other  Apostles,  that  with 
vicarious  power  he  should  be  the  prince  of  the 
apostolic  choir,  and  that  he  should  take  upon 
himself  the  supreme  supervision  and  authority — 
an  authority  to  be  transmitted  to  his  successors  in 
every  age — for  feeding  the  whole  flock,  for  con- 
firming the  brethren,  for  binding  and  loosing 
throughout  the  whole  world  ;  this  is  a  Catholic 
dogma^  which  the  whole  Church  hath  received  from 

dicere,  p.  551.  Si  quis  Cathedrae  Petri  jungitur,  meus  est.  The 
Roman  Faith  is  for  him  the  true  one  (Adv.  Rufin.,  b.  i.,  n.  4),  In 
like  manner  Cyprian  (in  Ep.  48,  al.  45,  ad  Cornel,  p.  132,  Coust.)  : 
Communicationem  tuam,  id  est,  Catholicce  Ecclesire  unitatem. 

^  Cf.  Dieringer  in  the  Theol.  Journal  of  Bonn,  1869,  p.  561. 

^  On  Chrysostom,  see  for  example,  Pichler  loc.cit.,  p.  123,  seq., 
vol.  i. 

^  So,  for  example,  when  Gregory  Nazianzen  (Carm.  de  Vita  Sua, 
p.  571,  ed.  Migne,  xxxrii.,  p.  1063),  calls  the  Roman  Church, 
**ir/)öe5pos  tQjv  ÖXcjv,"  the  president  of  all;  and  when  Ignatius 
(Ep.  ad  Rom.)  calls  the  same  Church  "  irpoKad-qixivT]  rijs  äydirrfs," 
the  one  who  presides  in  the  covenant  of  love. 

G 


98  The  Primacy  and  the  Papacy. 

the  lips  of  Christ,  which  she  hath  handed  down 
and  defended  by  the  continuous  preaching  of  the 
Fathers,  which  she  hath  firmly  held  in  all  times  with 
holy  reverence,  and  often  against  the  errors  of  in- 
novators, confirmed  by  decrees  of  Popes  and  of 
Councils.  In  this  pre-eminence  of  the  Apostolic 
See,  Christ  wished  that  the  bond  of  unity  should  be 
firmly  and  strongly  held,  whereby  the  Church, 
destined  to  spread  over  the  whole  world,  and  to 
be  composed  of  members  ever  so  remote,  should, 
by  the  union  of  all  under  one  head,  grow  into  a 
firmly  knit  body ;  and  so  it  should  be  brought 
about  that  the  strength  of  this  power  should  serve, 
not  so  much  for  the  elevation  of  this  See,  as  rather 
and  most  especially,  for  the  inviolability  and  in- 
tegrity of  the  whole  body.  Therefore  it  is  by  no 
means  to  be  wondered  at,  that  all  those  whom  in 
earlier  ages  the  ancient  foe  of  mankind  has  inspired 
with  his  hatred  against  the  Church,  should  have 
been  wont  to  direct  their  attacks  against  this  first 
See,  in  which  the  solidity  of  unity  is  embodied  ; 
in  order  that,  after  setting  aside  the  foundation- 
stone,  if  possible,  and  after  dissolving  the  union  of 
the  Churches  with  their  head — a  union  which  im- 
parts to  them  a  special  support,  vigour,  and  pros- 
perity— they  might  rob  the  Church  herself,  mis- 
handled in  this  miserable  way,  weakened,  and  torn 
asunder,  of  the  freedom  bestowed  by  Christ  upon 
her,  and  give  her  up  to  an  ignominious  servitude."^ 
But  the  primacy  in  itself  Janus  will  not  assail. 
"  He  distinguishes  between  the  original  germ  of 
the  primacy  in  the  apostolic  age,  (why  not  in  the 
time  of  Christ,  or  as  laid  down  by  Christ  himself  ?) 
and  that  colossal  monarchy  which,  in  the  thirteenth 
and  fourteenth  centuries,  presented  itself  before  the 
deluded  eyes  of  men  as  a  work,  that  came  ready- 
^  Pius  VL,  Breve  super  soliditate,  in  the  exordium. 


The  Primacy  a7id  the  Papacy.  99 

i;nade  from  the  hand  of  God."  "  The  primacy, 
we  are  further  told  (p.  xxi.),  rests  (and  of  that 
truth  every  Catholic  is  convinced,  and  to  that 
conviction  the  authors  of  this  book  profess  their 
adherence)  ;  the  primacy,  we  say,  rests  on  a 
higher  (why  not  a  divine  ?)  appointment.  The 
Church  from  the  first  was  founded  upon  it ;  and 
the  Lord  of  the  Church  ordained  its  type  in  the 
person  of  Peter  (but  did  not  establish  it  then). 
It  has,  therefore,  from  the  necessity  of  the  case, 
developed  itself  7ip  to  a  certain  point!'  But  what, 
then,  is  this  point  which  is  not  to  be  overpassed  .'* 
Has  the  Lord  of  the  Church  typified  \t  also  ?  Who 
has  fixed  this  point  .'*  Is  it  the  ancient  councils, 
or  the  scholars  of  the  present  day.?  Does  all 
ecclesiastical  development  cease  at  a  certain  defi- 
nite point  .-^  We  hear  only:  "That  from  the 
ninth  century  there  occurred  2,  fu7'tJier  development 
— artificial  and  sickly  rather  than  sound  and 
natural — of  the  primacy  into  the  Papacy,  a  transfor- 
mation more  than  a  development :  tJie  presidency 
in  the  ChnrcJi  became  an  empire,  when,  in  place 
of  the  first  bishop  deliberating  and  deciding  in 
union  with  his  *  brethren '  on  the  affairs  of  the 
Church,  and  setting  an  example  of  submission  to 
her  laws,  was  substituted  the  despotic  ride  of  an 
absolute  monarch  "  (p.  xxii.) 

Thus  the  expressions,  not  immediately  intel- 
ligible to  many  Catholic  readers,  become  perfectly 
clear.  The  Papacy,  in  contradistinction  to  the 
primacy,  is  the  despotic  rule  of  an  absolute  mon- 
arch ;  the  primacy  is  the  position  of  the  first 
bishop,  of  the  primus  inter  pares,  of  the  guardians 
of  the  canons  and  of  unity,  of  the  president  in  the 
episcopal  assembly.^  Far  beyond  this  notion  of 
the  primacy  does  the  holy  Bonaventura  go  when 
^  Febronius  (Hontheim)  de  Statu  Eccles.,  c.  2,  §  4, 


lOO        The  Primacy  and  the  Papacy. 

he  writes  :  "  One  is  the  Father  of  Fathers,  who  is 
rightly  called  Pope  (Papa),  as  the  sole,  first,  and 
supreme  spiritual  father  of  all  fathers,  nay,  of  all 
believers,  the  most  eminent  hierarch,  the  sole  bride- 
groom, the  undivided  head,  the  supreme  high 
priest,  the  vicegerent  of  Christ,  the  source,  the 
origin,  and  the  rule  of  all  ecclesiastical  powers, 
from  whom,  as  from  the  chief,  and  as  his  eminent 
dignity  in  the  ecclesiastical  hierarchy  requires, 
descends  the  order  of  jurisdiction  down  to  the 
lowest  members  of  the  Church."  '°  Far  beyond 
this  notion  rises,  too,  St  Bernard,  when  he  ad- 
dresses Pope  Eugenius  III.  thus:"  "Who  art 
thou  ?  The  high  priest,  the  supreme  bishop.  Thou 
art  the  prince  of  bishops — thou  art  the  heir  of  the 
Apostles.  Thou  art  Abel  in  primacy,  Noah  in 
government,  Abraham  in  the  patriarchal  rank,  in 
order  Melchisedech,  in  dignity  Aaron,  in  authority 
Moses,  Samuel  in  the  judicial  office,  Peter  in 
power,  and  Christ  in  unction.  Thou  art  he  to 
whom  the  keys  of  heaven  are  given,  to  whom  the 
sheep  are  intrusted.  There  are,  indeed,  other 
door-keepers  of  heaven,  and  other  shepherds 
of  the  flocks ;  but  thou  art  the  more  glorious 
in  proportion  as  thou  hast  also,  in  a  different 
fashion,  inherited  before  others  both  these  names. 
The  former  have  the  flocks  assigned  to  them, 
each  one  his  own:  to  thee  all  are  intrusted, 
one  flock  for  the  one.  Not  merely  for  the  sheep, 
but  for  all  the  shepherds  also  thou  art  the  one 
shepherd.  Whence  do  I  prove  this  t  thou  askest. 
From  the  word  of  the  Lord.  For  to  whom,  I  say 
not  among  the  bishops,  but  among  the  apostles, 
have  the  whole  flock  been  committed  in  a  man- 

^°  Bonav.    Breviloquium,  P.  vi.,  c.    12,  p.  250,  ed.  iii.      Cura 
Hefele  Tub.,  1861.     Cf.  in  1.  iv..  Sent.  Dist.  29,  a.  3,  qu.  i. 
^^  S.  Bernard,  de  Consider.,  1.  ii.,  c.  8. 


The  Primacy  a7id  the  Papacy.         i  o  i 

ner  so  absolute  and  so  undistinguishing  ?  '  If  thou 
lovest  mc,  Peter,  so  feed  my  sJiecp!  What  sheep  ? 
The  inhabitants  of  this  or  that  city  or  country, 
those  of  a  particular  kingdom  ?  My  sJieep,  He 
saith.  Who  doth  not  see  that  He  designates  not 
some,  but  all  ?  Nothing  is  excepted  where  nothing 
is  distinguished.  The  power  of  others  is  limited 
by  definite  bounds  ;  thine  extends  even  over  those 
who  have  received  authority  over  others.  Canst 
thou  not,  when  a  just  reason  occurs,  shut  up 
heaven  against  a  bishop,  depose  him  from  his  epis- 
copal office,  and  deliver  him  over  to  Satan  ?  (i  Cor. 
V.  5).  Thus  thy  privilege  is  immutable,  as  well 
in  the  keys  committed  to  thee,  as  in  the  sheep 
intrusted  to  thy  care." 

Again,  Hugh  of  St  Victor  writes  of  the  Pope  : 
"  He  is  called  Papa,  because  he  is  the  Father  of  the 
Fathers :  he  is  called  universalis,  because  he  pre- 
sides over  the  whole  Church  :  he  is  called  Apos- 
toliciis^  because  he  holds  the  place  of  the  Prince  of 
the  Apostles :  he  is  called  Sinnvnis  Pontifex,  be- 
cause he  is  the  head  of  all  bishops,"  '^  These  are  all 
clear  enunciations  of  the  genuine  Papal  system. 

But  many  of  these  names  and  predicates  of 
honour  had  been  long  before  attributed  to  the  Popes, 
and  even  by  the  Orientals.  Father  of  Fathers  the 
Pope  is  frequently  called  by  the  latter,  from  the 
sixth  century  downwards.'^  In  the  same  way  he  had 

^2  Lib.  i.,  Erud.  Theol.  de  Sacramentis,  c.  43.  Cf.  Serm.  64, 
de  SS.Apostolis  Petro  et  Paulo. 

^'^  So  he  was  called  in  the  Synodical  Epistle  sent  from  Byzantium 
to  Rome  after  the  election  of  Epiphanius,  in  the  year  520  (Mansi, 
viii.  504,  seq.) ;  so  again  by  Stephen  of  Larissa  (Thomassia  loc.  cit., 
II,  nn.  3,  4) ;  so,  too,  by  Sergius  of  Cyprus,  and  other  Orientals,  in 
the  year  649  (Mansi,  x.  903,  913) ;  and  so  by  Theodore  the  Studite 
(L=  i.,  ep.  33,  p.  1017,  seq.  ;  KopvcpatdraTO^  Trarrip  iraripuv,  "The 
supreme  Father  of  Fathers."  Photius  (de  Spiritü  Sancto  Mystagog., 
c.  81)  opposes  to  the  Latin  Fathers  Ambrose  and  Augustine,  Popes 
Damasus  and  Celestine  as  Fathers  of  the  Fathers. 


I02        The  Primacy  and  the  Papacy. 

long  borne  the  title  of  Apostolic  Father,  and  of 
Apostolicus/'^  But  the  title  Vicar  of  Christ  ap- 
pears to  many  strange  ;  and  Janus  (p.  159)  observes 
that  earlier,  and  even  down  to  the  end  of  the 
twelfth  century,  the  Pope  called  himself  the  Vicar 
of  Peter,  Vicarius  Petri,  but  that  from  the  time  of 
Innocent  III.  the  title  Vicar  of  Christ  has  quite 
superseded  the  ancient  one.  But  here  the  fact  is 
overlooked  that  the  ancients  used  the  words  *'  vica- 
rius and  successor,"  vicar  and  successor,  as  synony- 
mous ;  ^s  a  vicar  could  be  not  only  the  representative 
of  a  living,  but  also  the  successor  in  office  of  a 
deceased  person  ;  ^^  that  all  bishops  and  pastors 
were  once  called  vicars  of  Christ ;  '^  while  the  name 
*' Vicarius  Petri  "  designated  the  heir  of  the  Apostle 
endowed  with  special  prerogatives  ;  ^^  so  that  we 
can  well  conceive  the  Pope,  as  holding  immediately 
the  place  of  Peter,  and  mediately  the  place  of 
Christ.  Yet,  though  more  rarely,  the  Pope,  even 
from  the  fifth  century,  is  designated  also  as  the 

^*  Theod,  Stud.,  L.  i,,  ep.  34,  p.  1025.  Anastas.  Bibl.  Prsef.  in 
Cone.  viii.  Apostolatus  vester  in  Paschas,  ep.  ad  Leon.  I.  (Leo.  ep. 
54).  Paulin.  Diac.  libell.  ad  Zosim,  p.  960.  Vide  Coustant  Praef. 
in  epist.  Roman.  Pontif.,  p.  xi.,  n.  15.  The  expression,  Sedes  Apos- 
tolica  is,  in  St  Augustine,  synonymous  with  the  See  of  Rome,  as 
also  in  St  Athanasius  (Hist.  Ar.  ad  mon.,  c.  35  ;  ed.  Migne,  t.  xxv., 
734),  6  dTTOtrroXt/cos  9p6uos,  the  Apostolic  See. 

^5  Pope  Gregory  the  Great  (L.  i.,  ep.  4,)  calls  the  newly-elected 
Bishop  of  Milan,  Vicarius  S.  Ambrosii.  Cyprian  (Ep.  68,  al.  67, 
Coustant,  p.  215)  writes  to  Stephen,  "Qui  vicarius  et  successor 
eorum  (scilicet  Cornelii  et  Lucii)  factus  es." 

^^  The  Legates  in  Councils  are  called  Vicarii  (in  Greek  ToiroTTjprjra!) 
Austas.  Bibl.  /oc.  cit.  Vicarius  is  in  general  qui  vices  alterius  gerit, 
who  fills  the  place  of  another.     Cf.  Leo  M.,  ep.  93,  c.  i. 

^^  Cypr.  ep.  55,  ad  Cornel,  (p.  177,  Const.)  :  Neque  aliunde 
haereses  obortae  sunt  aut  nata  Schismata,  quam  dum  (inde  quod) 
sacerdoti  Dei  non  obtemperatur,  nee  unus  in  ecclesia  ad  tempus 
sacerdos  et  ad  tempus  judex  vice  Christi  cogitatur.  Hormisd.,  ep. 
25,  n.  2  :  Christi  vicarii  sacerdotes.  Regula  S.  Bened.,  c.  2  : 
(Abbas)  Christi  vices  agere  creditur. 

^^  Coustant,  loc.  cit.,  P.  x.,  n.  14. 


The  Primacy  and  tJic  Papacy.         \  03 

Vicar  of  C'lirist."'  The  failliful  have  no  (lifficulty  in 
rc^ardinj.^  him  as  tlic  one  wlio,  in  Clirist's  place, 
j:jüverns  Cliristentloin.  Janus  thinks,  indeed  (p.  40), 
"  it  is  but  one  step  from  this,  to  declare  the  Pope 
an  incarnatir)n  of  God."  liut  this  is  surely  a  lon^ 
step,  indeed  ;  for  nowhere  lias  been  attributed  to 
a  vicej^jerent  full  equality  with  the  head,  from 
whom  all  his  powers  emanate.  In  the  substitute 
we  require,  only  in  so  far  as  is  requisite,  the  quali- 
ties of  him  wh(jse  place  he  fills.  When  we  find, 
how  already,  in  the  sixth  century,  the  idea  of  the 
Pope  was  a  most  exalted  one — the  highest  which 
can  be  conceived  of  man^° — .so  wcare  led  to  rej:(ard 
the  transition  from  the  Primacy  to  the  Pai)acy  (in 
S(j  far  as  such  ever  took  place),  as  one  of  very  early 
occurrence. 

If  we  seek  for  a  further  exiilauation,  we  are  told 
"that  the  form  which  this  primacy  took,  dcpi tided 
on  tlic  concessions  of  the  particular  local  ckarekes, 
and  was  never,  therefore,  the  .same  everywhere, 
actinj^  within  certain  fixed  limits  i)rescribed  by 
law"  (p.  xxiii.)  We  do  not  for  the  j)resent  ask, 
what  doctrinal  and  historical  pnjofs  can  be  adduced 

•'^  In  the  acclamations  of  l>isho|)S  and  priests  to  Cidasiiis  :  Vica- 
rium  Christi  tc  vidcinuH,  A[Jost(jlurn  I'ctniin  tc  vidcmiis  ((icias.  cp. 
27,  n,  15),  In  tlic  Kc)man  Synod  of  the  year  531,  under  I'oi)e 
Boniface  II,  :  Neqiie  fas  est,  ut  a  ciilrnine  Apostolatfts  vestri  in 
aliquo  dissentiamus,  qiH*m  videlicet.  i])ie  (Jliristus  Dominus  nostei 
oiMiiiuin  no.lniiM  adnin'tn  \wiin  in  Icrris  esse  voluit  caput.  Anas- 
tasius  the  Librarian  says  (i'nef.  ad  vit.  S,  Joh.  ICIeeni,  ad  Joh.  viii.), 
Non  fas  est,  ut  al>s<|ue  vicario  Di'i,  n/is(/iu'  clavii^fto  Cirii,  .... 
absque  univcrsali  I'ontifice  ....  aliquicl  consummetur  aut  divul^jetur. 
Ilincinar  of  Kheinis(I'r;ef.  .id  Nicol.  I.^says,  I'ontifex  Konianus  virem 
in  tcrris  possidet  Av,  neque  fas  est,  ut  absque  l^irario  J)ei^  absque 
ur»iversiiali  I'onlifice  ....  aliquid  in  reljus  fidei  et  nnorum  con- 
HUinmetur  aut  divul^^jetur.  IJeiinettis,  I'.  l,t.  1 1,  p.  337.  .Sec  also 
th<!  words  of  Isidfjre  of  Seville,  in  note  23  below. 

'"  Liberatus(in  his  Hreviariun),  c.  22)  relates  how,  after  the  exile 
of  Pope  Silverius,  the  liishop  of  I'atara  went  to  the  I'jnperor  Jus- 
tinian ;  judicium  Dei  conlestatus  est  «le  tantx-  .sedis  episcopi  expul 
sione  ;  multos  esse  dicens  in  hoc  mundo  reges,  et  non  esse  unurn, 
sicut  ille  l'a()a  est  super  ecclesiam  mundi  totius  a  sua  sede  expulsus. 


I04         The  Primacy  and  the  Papacy. 

for  this  dependence  on  the  concessions  of  particular 
local  churches;  but  we  ask  only  if  these  particular 
churches,  without  contradiction,  permitted,  nay, 
gladly  assented  to  this  extension  of  power  in  the 
Roman  see,  to  this  growth  of  the  primacy  into  the 
Papacy  ?  we  ask,  was  this  extension  of  power 
unlawful,  or  was  the  growth  of  the  primacy  into 
the  Papacy  licit  ?  If  the  question  is  answered  in 
the  affirmative,  then  must  the  complaints  of  our 
Janus  be  hushed  ;  if  in  the  negative,  then  must  he 
shoWjwhatbesidesthe  concessions  and  the  consensus 
of  particular  churches  (which  are  here  supposed),was 
still  wanting  to  legitimize  this  extension  of  power. 
If  the  Popes  were  fully  convinced  of  the  lav/fulness 
of  their  proceedings  (p.  i86)  ;  if  the  ancient  canons 
of  Nicaea,  Chalcedon,  and  others,  appeared  to 
them  no  longer  adequate  ;  if  they  were  supported 
by  the  consent  of  particular  churches  ; — then,  sub- 
jectively, their  conduct  was  perfectly  justified.  If 
any  objective  rule  was  opposed  to  their  proceedings, 
what  was  it }  But  as  regards  the  assent  of  par- 
ticular churches;  so,  certainly,  from  the  Catholic 
point  of  view,  we  must  understand  thereby  the 
assent  of  the  bishops.  But,  taking  the  Episcopate 
as  a  whole,  we  find  but  very  few  examples  of 
resistance  to  Papal  ordinances  f^  the  contrary 
instances  are  vastly  more  numerous,  and  extend 

^^  We  shall  have  occasion  later  to  illustrate  several  of  these 
examples.  Here  we  may  be  permitted  to  remind  the  reader  that 
the  independent  position  of  the  ancient  Spanish  Church  did  not 
arise,  as  Janus  himself  confesses  (p.  284),  from  a  non-recognition 
of  the  Roman  Primacy,  and  that  it  was  only  after  the  Arab  invasion 
the  latter  fell  more  into  the  background.  Cf.  Bennettis,  P.  I,  t.  v., 
p.  31,  seq.  If  individual  bishops,  like  Hincmar  of  Rheims  in  the 
case  of  Gottschalk  (p,  76),  sought  to  avoid  the  sentence  of  the  see  of 
Rome  (Neander's  Church  History,  vol.  Ii,  p.  263,3d  ed.),  (and  for 
such  a  sentence  a  Nicholas  I.  was  certainly  not  wanting  in  capacity) ; 
and  if  ten  years  were  then  spent  in  disputes  on  the  doctrine  of  pi"e- 
destination,  without  any  appeal  being  made  to  the  Pope,  all  this 
proves  nothing  against  the  rights  of  the  Papacy. 


\ 


The  Primacy  a7id  the  Papacy.         105 

through  all  ages  down  to  the  present  times. 
Janus  even  complains  (p.  189)  of  the  "slavish  spirit" 
of  the  French  bishops  in  the  thirteenth  century,  as 
well  as  of  the  too  great  patience  and  humility  of 
the  German  nation  in  the  fifteenth  (p.  307).  It 
is  still  very  remarkable,  that  of  the  authors  well 
acquainted  with  the  charges  brought  against  the 
Popes  and  their  administration,  all  rigidly  adhered 
to  the  principle  of  right,  and  preached  up  a  silent 
and  patient  obedience  (p.  233).  Were  they  not  then 
to  counsel  resistance,  and  to  renounce  their  obe- 
dience ?  The  principle  that  we  are  justified  in 
refusing  by  reason  of  their  faults  to  superiors, 
whether  ecclesiastical  or  civil,  in  a  state  of  sin,  the 
submission  due  to  them, has  never  been  the  doctrine 
of  the  Church  ;  nay,  has  been  expressly  condemned 
by  her.^^  What,  then,  was  to  be  done  ?  The  view 
current  in  the  whole  Middle  Ages,  that  whoever 
submits  not  to  the  Pope,  is  a  heretic,^^  "  has 
disarmed  the  Church;  has  caused  the  neglect  of 
that  first  principle  of  7nora  I  Sind  political  prudence, 
that  an  abuse  should  be  resisted  at  the  beginning, 
and  has  thus  made  the  corruption  in  the  Church 
incurable,  and  the  attempted  reformation  too  late, 
when  it  was  at  last  undertaken  "  (p.  262). 

These  are,   indeed,   desolate   prospects !      Why 

-2  Art.    15,   WicI,  damnat.  a  Cone.   Constant,  Art.  Joh.   Huss, 
Denziger  Enchir.,  nn.  491,  550,  pp.  187,  193,  ed.  iv. 

"^  Alcuin  ep.  70  :  Ne  schismaticus  inveniatur  aut  non  Catholicus, 
sequatur  probatissimam  Romance  ecclesise  auctoritaem,  ut  unde 
Catholicae  fidei  initia  accepimus,  inde  exempla  salutis  nostrse- 
semper  habeamus.  Ne  membra  a  Capite  separentur,  ne  claviger 
regni  coelestis  abjiciat,  quos  a  suis  deviasse  cognoverit  doctrinis. 
S.  Isid.  Hispal.  ep.  ad  Claud,  ducem :  Sic  nos  scimus  praeesse 
Ecclesiae  Christi,  quatenus  Romano  Pontifici  reverenter,  humiliter 
et  devote  tamquam  Dei  Vicario  prae  ceteris  prrelatis  specialius  nos 
fateamur  debitam  in  omnibus  obedientiam  exhibere.  Contra  quod 
quern  cunque  procaciter  venientem  tamquavi  hcereticum  a  consortio 
fidelium  omnino  decemimus  alienum. 


io6         The  Primacy  and  the  Papacy, 

did  not  the  men  who  bear  the  collective  name  of 
Janus,  live  earlier,  before  it  was  too  late  ?  Why- 
was  not  the  evil  immediately  recognized,  and  what 
was  the  beginning  of  this  evil  ? 

The  Papal  primacy  has  surely  its  history.  Its 
first  times  are  traced  by  DöUinger  in  the  following 
sketch : — 

"■  Like  every  living  thing,  like  to  the  Church 
herself,  whose  crown  and  key-stone  it  is,  the 
Papacy  has  passed  through  an  historical  develop- 
ment full  of  the  most  manifold  and  surprising 
changes. 

"  But  in  this  its  history — the  law,  which  is  the 
fundamental  principle  of  the  Church's  life,  is  not 
to  be  mistaken — namely,  the  law  of  constant  de- 
velopment, of  evolution  from  within.  The  Papacy 
must  share  all  the  destinies  and  the  vicissitudes  of 
the  Church,  and  must  take  part  in  her  every  pro- 
cess of  formation.  Its  birth  begins  with  two  mighty, 
pregnant,  and  far-reaching  words  of  the  Lord.  He, 
to  whom  these  words  are  addressed,  realises  them 
in  his  person  and  in  his  acts,  and  transplants  the 
institute  to  which  he  has  been  appointed  into  the 
centre  of  the  infant  Church,  to  the  Roman  capital 
itself  Here  it  grows  up  in  silence,  occulto  velut 
arbor  cevo ;  and  in  the  earliest  times  it  manifests 
itself  only  in  particular  traits,  till  the  outlines  of 
the  ecclesiastical  power  and  action  of  the  Bishop 
of  Rome  become  ever  clearer  and  more  definite. 
A  Iready,  even  in  the  times  of  the  Roman  empire,  the 
Popes  are  the  guardians  of  the  whole  Church ;  who  in 
all  directions  put  foi'th  warnings  and  exhortationSy 
who  admi7iister  and  judge,  bind  and  loose.  Not 
rarely  complaints  are  uttered  of  the  use  which  they 
make  of  their  power.  Resistance  is  offered,  because 
the  Pope  is  held  to  be  deceived,  and  an  appeal  is 
made  to  a  Pontiff  better  informed  ;  but  never  is  the 


The  Primacy  and  the  Papacy,         107 

Papal  authority  contested.  In  general,  the  inter- 
vention in  ecclesiastical  concerns  was  the  less 
necessary ;  the  reins  of  ecclesiastical  government 
less  needed  to  be  tightly  drawn,  so  long  as  the 
whole  Church,  with  a  few  exceptions,  was  con- 
tained within  the  limits  of  the  Roman  empire,  and 
was  so  held  together  by  the  strong  bonds  of  that 
political  organisation,  that  there  was  neither  occa- 
sion nor  prospect  of  success  for  any  resistance  on 
the  part  of  the  various  nationalities,  broken  up  and 
down-trodden  as  they  were  by  the  domination  of 
the  Romans."  '^ 

But  this  development  of  the  Papal  power  we 
must  now  more  closely  examine  in  detail,  and  fur- 
nish historic  proofs  of  its  growing  activity. 

24  Döllinger's  "  Church  and  Churches,"  pp.  31-33. 


CHAPTER  VII. 

THE   PRIMACY  AND  ITS  DEVELOPMENT 

|F  the  Popes  of  the  first  ages,  who  were 
mostly  martyrs,  but  little  has  been  handed 
down  to  us;  but  even  the  extant  docu- 
ments suffice  to  show  the  power  and  the 
influence  of  the  Roman  See.  In  the  first  centuries, 
all  the  consequences,  which  were  to  be  evolved  from 
the  idea  of  the  Primacy,  were  naturally  not  yet 
developed ;  but  the  idea  remained  ever  the  same, 
and  ever  did  the  Church  possess  and  desire  in  the 
Primacy  a  centre  of  unity.' 

"  What  St  Irenaeus  in  the  second  century  had 
so  clearly  and  conclusively  enunciated,  that  the 
Roman  Church,  among  all  churches  of  apostolic 
origin,  is  the  first  and  the  most  eminent ;  that 
among  these  churches  it  has  the  same  superiority 
as  Peter  and  Paul  among  the  apostles  ;  and  that 
the  faith  of  this  Church  is  the  rule  and  the  standard 
for  the  faith  of  all  other  churches ; — this  language 
of  St  Irenaeus,  I  say,  is  that  of  all  succeeding  ages, 
with  all  who  are  truly  and  loyally  devoted  to  the 
Church.  But  if  this  is  the  case,  if  Rome  ever  stood 
in  the  course  of  its  development  at  the  head  of  the 

^  Beidtel  Canon  Law,  p.  io8  ;  Ratisbon,  1849.  See  also  Ritter's 
Church  History,  t.  i,  p.  149,  6th  ed.  (in  German). 


The  Primacy  and  its  Development.     109 

whole  Church,  and  in  all  ecclesiastical  questions 
gave  the  final  decision;^  then  must  this  Church  be 
animated  by  a  peculiar  spirit,  and  be  endowed  with 
a  special  grace  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  that  guideth 
the  Church  into  all  truth  :  then  on  this  particular 
Church  must  the  essence  of  the  whole  Church  be 
most  faithfully  impressed,  and  be  most  strikingly 
apparent.  And,  on  the  contrary,  if  nowhere  as 
here,  the  ruling  of  the  Holy  Spirit  reveals  itself  in 
such  fulness  and  force  ;  if  nowhere  as  here,  ecclesi- 
astical faith  and  ecclesiastical  maxims  find  their 
true,  full  expression  ;  so  there  is  for  other  churches, 
in  so  far  as  they  have  by  the  side  of  Rome  an 
independent  existence,  and  pursue  a  course  of 
development,  the  possibility  and  the  danger  of 
falling,  in  a  greater  or  a  less  degree,  into  a  one-sided 
course,  of  either  falling  short  of  the  full  truth,  or  of 
stepping  beyond  it,  and  distorting  it.  In  the  many 
and  manifold  forms  of  ecclesiastical  life,  Rome 
appears  as  the  general  regulator,  as  the  power  at 
once  tenacious  and  stirring,  conservative  and  crea- 
tive alike — the  true  vital  centre  of  the  Church, 
whereby  the  unity  of  the  whole  is  preserved,  and 
all  the  parts  rescued  from  the  danger  of  isolation 
and  disrupture,  and  brought  back  and  retained  in 
general  harmony."^ 

Already  in  the  question  proposed  by  the  Corin- 
thians to  Pope  Clement  in  the  hfetime  of  St  John 
the  Apostle,^  already  in  the  efforts  of  the  most 
ancient  heretics  to  find  recognition  at  Rome,^ 
already  in  the  journey  of  St  Polycarp,  Bishop  of 
Smyrna  and  of  Hegesippus  to  Pope  Auicetus,  and 

2  Adv.  Haeres.  iii.  3.  Cf.  Hagemann,  The  Roman  Church,  p.  614, 
seq.     Freiburg,  1864. 

3  Hagemann,  loc.  at.,  P.  i,  seq.  For  this  truth  the  whole  book 
furnishes  copious  proofs. 

*  Upon  the  epistle  see  Hagemann,  especially  p.  684,  seq. 
5  Valentinus,  Marcion,  Cerdon,  Theodotus,  Praxeas,  Cleomenes, 
&c. 


I  lo     The  Primacy  and  its  Development, 

in  the  epistle  of  Pope  Soter,^  held  at  Corinth  in 
as  much  reverence  as  that  of  dementes,  we  find 
significant  data  and  traces  of  the  superior  power  of 
the  Bishops  of  Rome.  Pope  Victor  I.,  in  whose 
pontificate  even  Protestant  authors  "have  found 
combined  all  the  agencies  of  the  Papacy,"^  ex- 
cluded Theodotus  of  Byzantium  from  the  Church,^ 
commanded  Synods  to  be  everywhere  held  upon 
the  question  of  the  paschal  celebration, and  menaced 
with  excommunication  the  recalcitrant  inhabitants 
of  Asia  Minor.  His  competency  to  enforce  this 
last  measure  none  disputed,  not  even  Irenseus,  who 
sought  on  very  different  grounds  to  dissuade  him 
from  it.  The  view  supported  by  Victor  was  every- 
where, except  in  Asia  Minor,  accepted,  and  in  like 
manner  adopted  by  the  Nicene  Council.^  Surely 
the  resistance  of  some  individual  bishops — a  re- 
sistance which  we  meet  with  later,  even  down  to  the 
last  centuries — cannot  be  adduced  by  the  oppo- 
nents of  the  primacy  as  a  decisive  proof  in  their 
favour. 

How  powerful  was  the  intervention  of  Victor's  suc- 
cessors, Zephyrinus  and  Callistus,  in  all  the  ecclesi- 
astical questions  of  their  time,  especially  in  that  of 
the  Penitential  discipline,  we  learn  from  the  lips  of 
their  opponents.'^  Pope  Fabian  issued  a  decree 
against  the  guilty  Bishop,  Privatus."  His  succes- 
sor, Cornelius,  who  is  known  to  have  written  nine 
epistles,  whereof  three   only  are   extant,"  held  a 

^  Iren,  ad  Vict,  Eus.  Hist.  Eccles.  v.  24,  iv.  22,  23,  Hier,  catal.  c.22. 

^  Schwegler,  The  Post- Apostolic  Age,  ii.,  pp.  214,  215. 

8  Eus.  H.  E.,  V.  28. 

®  Eus.  H.  E.,  V.  22-25.  Hagemann,  P.  14,  seq.  ;  22,  seq.  ;  75, 
seq.;  561,  seq.;  582,  seq.  Hefele  Conc.  I.,  p.  73,  seq.  Coustant  in 
Epist.  Rom.  Pontif.,  p.  91,  seq. 

^^  Philosophoumena,  L.  ix.  Compare  Döllinger,  Hippolytus,  and 
Callistus,  p.  130,  seq.     Hagemann,  p.  51,  seq. 

^^  Cypr.  ep.  55,  p.  84.     Ed.  Baluz.  Jaffe  Reg.,  n.  6. 

12  Jaffe  Reg.,  n.  7-15,  pp.  7,  8. 


The  Primacy  and  its  Developmeiit,      1 1 1 

Synod  of  sixty  bishops  against  Novatian/^  and 
kept  up  a  friendly  intercourse  with  Cyprian,  Bishop 
of  Carthage.  The  latter  required  his  successor, 
Stephen  L,  to  ordain  the  deposition  of  Marcianus, 
Bishop  of  Aries,  and  the  election  of  another  in  his 
place.  To  Stephen,  the  Spanish  Bishop,  Basilides 
appealed,  and  from  him  obtained  restoration  to  his 
See ;  an  act  in  which  Cyprian  disputed  not  the 
right  of  the  Pope,  but  blamed  only  the  special 
exercise  of  that  right.'-^  What  we  yet  know  of  the 
expressions  of  Pope  Stephen  in  the  controversy  on 
heretical  baptism,  shows  a  full  consciousness  of  his 
exalted  dignity,  and  a  high  sense  of  duty.  "  With 
energetic  determination,  and  apostohc  courage,"  he 
opposed  the  error  of  the  rebaptism  of  heretics,  and 
required  the  acceptance  of  the  Roman  practice, 
which  at  last  obtained  a  final  triumph  in  the 
Church."  ^^  The  controversy  of  Cyprian  and 
Firmihan  was  as  passionate  as  it  was  sophistic, 
and  on  that  account  cannot  be  here  taken  into 
consideration,  to  say  nothing  of  Cyprian's  earlier 
attitude  towards  the  Roman  See.  Dionysius, 
Bishop  of  Rome,  received  from  Dionysius  of  Alex- 
andria, who  had  been  accused  before  him,  an 
apology,  and  gave  in  reply  an  accurate  dogmatic 
exposition  of  the  doctrine  of  the  Trinity.^^     This 

^^  Eus.  H.  E.  vi.  43.    Lib.  synod,  ap.  Voell.etJust.Bibl.il., p.  11 17. 

^■^  Döllinger's  Manual  of  Church  History,  vol.  i.,  p.  49.  Ritter, 
loc.  cit,  p.  15.     Cypr.  ep.  67,  68. 

^^  Hagemann,  p.  52.  Cf.  Nat.  Alex.  Eccl.  Saec.  IH.,  c.  3,  a.  5, 
§  4.  .  .  .  Certainly  Stephen  also  appealed  to  his  primacy.  Cyprian 
(Ep.  71,  ad  Quintum)  holds  up  before  him  the  example  of  Peter 
(quern  primum  Dominus  elegit,  et  super  quern  aedificavit  Ecclesiam 
suam)  in  his  dispute  with  Paul,  wherein  the  former  did  not  say,  se 
primatum  teuere,  et  obtemporari  ä  novellis  et  posteris  sibi  potius 
oportere.  Cf.  Constant  in  Epist.  Rom.  Pontif.  Diss,  de  Stephani 
sententia,  pp.  227-255.  Denzinger's  "  Criticism  on  the  Lectures  of 
Thiersch,"  L,  p.  88,  seq. 

^^  Äthan  de  syn  c.  43,  Migne  xxvi.  669,  Jaffe  n.  24,  p.  11.     Cou- 


1 1 2     The  Primacy  and  its  Development. 

Janus  himself  acknowledges.  He  finds  this  the 
only  exception  from  the  rule,  "  that  the  Bishops  of 
Rome  in  the  first  ages  accomplished  no  dogmatic 
result."  But  he  subj oins,  "the  writing  of  Dionysius, 
if  any  authoritative  importance  had  been  ascribed 
to  it,  was  well  fitted  in  itself  to  cut  short,  or  rather 
strangle  in  its  birth,  the  long  Arian  disturbance ; 
but  it  was  not  known  out  of  Alexandria,  and  exer- 
cised no  influence  whatever  on  the  later  course  of 
the  controversy"  (p.  64).  But  how  many  authori- 
tative writings  of  the  primitive  ages  have  been 
otherwise  lost,  or  by  a  happy  chance  only  have 
been  preserved  in  fragments?  And  hereby  the 
fact  remains  clear,  that  according  to  the  testimony 
of  Athanasius,  his  celebrated  predecessor  was  ac- 
cused before  the  tribunal  of  the  Bishop  of  Rome, 
justified  himself  before  the  latter,  and  accordingly 
corrected  his  views  by  the  doctrinal  standard  of 
the  Roman  Church. 

If  now,  in  the  whole  period  from  Dionysius  to 
Sylvester  (an.  269-335),  "there  is  no  sign  of  doc- 
trinal activity"  (p.  (i'j)  ; ''  so  it  by  no  means  thence 
follows,  that  no  records  of  such  activity  had  been 
in  existence.  The  genuine  Papal  Decretals,  that 
have  been  preserved,  begin  only  with  the  year  385. 
But  we  know  in  what  a  reverential  way  the  Synod 
of  Aries  wrote  in  the  year  314  to  Pope  Syl- 
vester ;  '^  how  then  Pope  Julius  enforced  against 
the   Eusebians,  what  he  had   received  from   the 

stant,  p.  271,  seq.  Routh  Rel.,  Sac.  iii.  179,  seq.  Cf.  Dittrich 
Dionysius  the  Great,  pp.  93,  in,  Ii5-     Freiburg,  1867. 

^7  We  here  pass  over  the  fragment  of  a  dogmatic  epistle  of  Pope 
Fehx  I.,  who  flourished  from  269  to  274,  and  which  was  cited  at 
the  Council  of  Ephesus,  in  the  year  431.  Vide  Mansi  Concil.  i., 
p.  1 1 14;  Jafife,  n.  27,  p.  n,  which  Hagemann  also  speaks  of,  loc. 
cit.,  p.  480.      Cf.  Coustant,  loc.  at,  p.  295. 

18  Communi  copula  caritatis  et  unitate  matris  Ecclesise  catholicx 
inhaerentes  ad  Arelatensium  civitatem  piissimi  Imperatoris  voluntate 


The  Primacy  and  its  Development.     1 1 3 

Apostle  Peter,  and  blamed  them  for  not  having 
written  anything  on  the  cause  of  Athanasius  to 
Rome,  whence  the  decision  was  to  be  obtained  ;  ^^ 
how,  lastly,  Damasus  praised  the  Orientals  for 
having  manifested  towards  the  Roman  See  the  due 
reverence,  whereby  they  had  achieved  for  them- 
selves the  greatest  honour. ^°  But  we  are  assured 
(p.  6^]),  in  the  Arian  disputes  the  Roman  See  for  a 
long  time  remained  passive.  No  one  sought  from 
it  aid  or  counsel ;  in  the  transactions  and  com- 
motions that  occurred  from  the  year  359,  "the 
Pope's  name  is  never  once  mentioned  ;  and  it  was 
only  some  years  afterwards  he  gave  a  sign  of  life, 
when  he  adopted  the  procedure  of  the  Synod  of 
Alexandria  against  the  bishops,  who  had  fallen  at 
Rimini  "  (pp.  6%,  69). 

Thus  the  loss  of  many  Papal  epistles  is  used  for 
a  proof  of  the  inactivity  and  the  insignificance  of 
Rome.  But  all  in  vain.  Against  this  assumption 
speaks,  in  the  first  place,  the  sentence  of  Pope  Julius 
for  the  restoration  of  Athanasius  and  of  the  other 
bishops  deposed  by  the  Arians,  as  related  by  the 


adducti,  inde  te,  gloriosissime  Papa,  commerita  reverentia  salutamus 
.  .  .  Utinam  ad  hoc  Interesse  spectaculum /'^«//yd'mj'^s/  Profecto 
credimus,  quia  in  eos  severior  fuisset  sententia  prolata,  et  te  pariter 
nobiscum  judicante,  coetus  noster  majore  laetitia  exultasset,  Sed. 
quoniam  recedere  a  partibus  illis  minime  potuisti,  ?>z  qiiihis  et 
Apostoli  quotidie  sedcnt  et  cruor  ipsoram  sine  intermissione  Dei 
gloriam  testatur,  &c.  .  .  .  placuit  etiam  a  te  qui  majores  dioeceses 
tenes  per  te  potissimum  omnibus  insinuari.  Coustant,  p.  345,  seq. 
Ilagemann,  p.  561,  seq. 

^"^  Jul.  ap.  Äthan.  Apol.,  c.  35,  (Migne  xxv.  308) :  •^  a.'yvoei.Te,  8ti 
TOVTO  idos  (Nie.  c.  6)  irpörepov  ypd^eadat  ijfjuu  Kai  ovtcos  evdev  öpli'ecydac 
TO,  StKOitt ;  Are  you  ignorant,  that  this  is  the  custom  (old  custom, 
as  Nie.  can.  6)  first  to  write  to  us,  that  thence  what  is  just  may  be 
decreed? — Tr. 

-"  Dam.  ep.  ad  Orient.  Theod.  HE.  v.  10,  Coustant,  p.  517. 
Jafife  n.  59  :  otl  rfj  diroaToXiKrj  Kadedpa  tt]v  ö(pei\ofj.evr]i>  aiSQ  rj  dyd-rrrj 
vfxQv  dirov^fiei  k.  t.  X.  That  your  charity  accords  to  the  Holy  See 
the  due  reverence,  &c. — Tr. 

H 


1 1 4     The  Primacy  and  its  Development. 

Greek  historians  ;  ''^  in  the  second  place,  the  con- 
fession presented  to  the  Pope  by  Valens  and 
Ursacius,  wherein  they  assert  that  they  have  re- 
ceived pardon  from  him  ; "  in  the  third  place,  the 
efforts  of  the  Emperor  Constantius  to  bring  over 
to  his  side  the  Pope  Liberius,  above  all,  who  had 
been  so  long  steadfast ;  ^^  and  in  the  fourth  place, 
the  steps  taken  by  the  semi-Arian  bishops  of  the 
East  to  obtain  the  recognition  of  Rome  ;  ^^  fifthly, 
the  decrees  issued  by  Pope  Damasus  against 
various  heresies, — decrees  which  were  subscribed 
by  the  bishops  of  the  province  of  Antioch,  and 
obtained  great  authority  in  the  whole  Church  ;  ^^ 
sixthly,  the  request  of  St  Basil  to  Athanasius  to 
send,  by  reason  of  the  calamities  of  the  East,  en- 
voys to  the  West,  where  he  was  held  in  the  greatest 
consideration,  and  from  which  help  was  more  im- 

^^  Socr,  II.  17,  al.  xi.  ;  0  5e,  are  trpovbixta  ttjs  h  "P(h[iri  eKKKijaias 
fXoiJcrv^)  irapp-qcnaffTLKOLs  ypcLfi/xaaiv  (hxvp<Jicrev  aiiTovs  kul  iiri  tt]v 
dvaToK-rjv  dvaareXXet  avrovs,  rbv  OLKetov  eKdcrrio  dpovov  d7ro5i5oi)s  /cat 
KadaTTTO/iievos  tCöv  irpoirerCjs  KadeXdvTuiv  avrovs.  And  he  (the  Pope), 
inasmuch  as  the  Church  in  Rome  possessed  special  privileges,  in 
outspoken  letters  confirmed  them  (the  bishops),  and  sends  them 
back  to  the  East,  restoring  to  each  his  own  see,  and  rebuking  those 
who  had  rashly  deposed  them. 

22  Coust.,  p.  405  :  i]  deoaeßetd  aov  Kara  rrju  k/JL<pVTOV  iain-ijs 
KoXoKdyadLap  Ty  TrXdvrj  TjfxQv  KOLTTj^'naae  cvyyvü/xrjv  öovvaL  :  Thy 
piety,  according  to  its  innate  rectitude  and  goodness,  has  deemed 
right  to  pardon  our  error. 

28  Äthan.  Hist.  Arian.  ad  mon,  c.  35,  p.  734,  ed.  Migne.  The 
Heathen  Ammianus  Marcellinus  (xv.  c.  7.)  relates  the  pressure  of 
the  emperor  on  Liberius,  Christianas  legis  Antistes,  and  observes 
id  enim  (the  expulsion  of  Athanasius)  licet  impletum  sciret,  tamen 
auctoritate  quoque  qua  potiores  (2ter7iae  urbis  episcopi,  firmari  de- 
siderio  nitebat2ir  ardenti. 

^  Hefele  Cone.  I.,  p.  712,  äseq.  Coustant,  ep.  14,  p.  453,^1?^. 
Ibid.,  the  Answer  of  Pope  Liberius,  ep.  14,  p.  457,  sa/.  The  Pope 
wished  to  proclaim  the  just  things  to  those  seeking  them  :  BorjOrjaai 
TOis  diKata  aiTOVfx^voLS . — Ibid.,  n.  4.,  p.  464. 

25  Theod.  HE.  V.,  11.  Hefele  I.,  718,  719,  n.  i.  Merenda 
Admonit  in  Dam.  ep.  4.  Coustant,  p.  489,  sei/.  Compare  Janus, 
PP-  73,  74- 


The  Primacy  and  its  Development.     1 1 5 

mediately  to  be  expected ;  ^^  and  lastly,  the  testi- 
mony of  the  same  Basil  in  his  letter  to  Damasus, 
that  the  Roman  Church  had,  in  former  times,  ever 
solaced  and  visited  the  Orientals,  as  these  now 
desired.^'  An  epistle  received  thereupon,  and  the 
mission  of  the  deacon  Sabinus  were  in  the  year 
372  received  by  Basil  with  great  joy,  and  the 
delegation  of  several  envoys  from  the  West  was 
ardently  requested. ^^  The  priest  Evagrius  brought 
back  in  the  year  373  the  documents  which  had 
been  sent  by  Basil  to  Rome,  and  which  did  not 
satisfy  the  Roman  spirit  of  exactness,  and  stated 
the  desire  that  they  were  to  be  worded  according 
to  the  formulary  there  sketched,  and  that  trust- 
worthy men  were,  at  the  same  time,  to  be  deputed 
to  Rome.^9  From  Ascholius  the  papal  vicar  in 
Thessalonica,  Basil  moreover  received  letters,  that 
gave  him  great  pleasure ;  3°  but,  in  a  letter  to 
Evagrius  he  complains  that  he  wants  a  competent 
man  for  the  journey  to  the  West ;  for  the  way  to 
Rome  in  375  was  very  unsafe.^^  Of  all  these 
earlier  epistles  Janus  knows  nothing  ;  he  knows 
only  the  later  ones  (p.  ^j,  Note),  wherein  is  ex- 
pressed the  displeasure  of  the  great  Cappadocian 
with  the  Westerns,  who  were  so  ill-informed  of  the 

26  Basil,  ep.  66-69.  (Migne  xxxii.,  p.  424,  seq.  432.)  Cf.  ep. 
68,  ad  Melet.,  p.  428. 

27  Basil,  ep.  70,  p.  433  (Coust.  p.  476):  tovtwv  fiiav  irpoaeSoKt]' 
aafiev  "Kiaiv  rr\v  Trjs  vfj-erepas  evairXayxt'^CLS  iirlaKeiraiv  Kai  i\pvxo.'yürfT]- 
aev  ijfids  del  to  Trapddo^ov  ttjs  vfxerepas  dydirrjs  t(3  irapeXdövri 
XP^fV-  (Horum  unicam  solutionem  exspectavimus,  miserationis 
vestrae  visitationem  :  ac  nos  semper  consolata  est  mirabilis  vestra 
Caritas  prseterito  tempore.     Maurist  Translation,  Paris,  1 730. 

■•^^  Bas.  ep.  90,  91,  92,  p.  472,  et  seq. 

^  Ep.  138,  c.  2,  ad  Eus.,  p.  580. 

3"  Ep,  154,  p.  609;  ep.  164,  165,  p.  633.  The  Archbishop  of 
Thessalonica  belonged  certainly,  in  the  opinion  of  Basil,  to  the 
Westerns  (the  5vtikol). 

=*i  Bas.  ep.  156,  c.  3,  p.  617  ad.  Evagr.— ep.  215,  p,  792,  ad 
Doroth. 


1 1 6     TJie  Prhnacy  and  its  Development. 

circumstances  of  the  East,  who  repulsed  Meletlus, 
the  patriarch  of  Antioch,  and  who  were  arrogant 
withal.^^  But  this  displeasure  may  easily  be  ac- 
counted for  by  the  historical  circumstances  of  the 
time.  Deceived  in  his  hopes,  he  will  expect 
nothing  more  from  the  West,  yet  he  yearningly 
turns  to  it  again  :  the  Westerns  are  to  be  physi- 
cians to  the  sick,  and  teachers  of  those  in  health.^^ 
Later,  he  cherishes  again  more  hope  ;  ^4  and,  in  the 
year  377,  he  sends  a  letter  of  thanksgiving  to 
Rome.  He  states  that  a  Council  of  Tyana  re- 
established Eustathius,  bishop  of  Sebaste,  who  had 
brought  a  Papal  rescript;  but  he  laments  his  errors, 
as  well  as  those  of  Apollinarius  and  Paulinus.^^ 
Had  the  epistles  of  Pope  Damasus  been  known  to 
him  (he  died  on  the  ist  January  379),  they  would 
have  made  him  truly  happy :  so  deeply  did  he 
grieve  to  see  Meletius  numbered  among  heretics 
by  Pope  Damasus,  as  well  as  by  Peter,  patriarch 
of  Alexandria.36 

The  more  abundantly  historical  sources  are 
opened  to  us,  the  more  numerous  are  the  testi- 
monies for  the  primacy  of  the  Roman  Church. 
From  all  parts  of  the  Christian  world,  the  popes 
received  reports  ;^^  it  is  universally  acknowledged 
that  all  important  affairs  of  the  Church  are  to  be 
referred   to  their  see.     This  fact  is  declared  not 


22  Ep.  214,  c.  2,  p.  785  ;  ep.  239,  c.  2,  p.  893.  Basil  calls  the 
Pope  Tov  Kopv<^oXov  tQv  e/c  ttjs  ööa-ecds,  "  the  Head  of  the  Westerns." 

2"  Ep.  242,  c.  3,  p.  901.     Cf,  ep.  243. 

^4  Ep.  253,  254,  255,  p.  940,  se^. 

^^  Ep.  263,  p.  976. 

^^  Ep.  266,  p.  993,  c.  2. 

'^  Pope  Damasus  (ep.  3,  pp.  481,  488,  ed.  Constant)  mentions 
the  ävacpopd  (report)  of  the  Brethren  in  Gaul  and  in  Venice ;  Pope 
Siricius,  too  (ep.  I,  c.  I,  p.  624),  makes  mention  of  the  report 
(relatio)  of  Himerius,  bishop  of  Tarragona,  to  his  predecessor, 
Damasus. 


Tue  Primacy  and  its  Development.      1 1  7 

only  by  popes,  like  Innocent  I.  for  cxample,^^  but 
by  councils  also,  as  by  those  of  Sardica,  Milevi, 
and  Ephesus,^^  as  well  as  by  the  most  eminent 
bishops/°    and    even    by   emperors    themselves/' 

^^  Innoc.  I.,  ep.  29,  n.  i,  p.  888,  ed.  Constant :  In  requirendis 
Dei  rebus,  quas  omni  cum  soUicitudine  decet  a  sacerdotibus, 
maxime  a  vero  justoque  et  catholico  tractari  Concilio,  aiitiqtKe 
traditionis  exanpla  servantes  et  ccclesiasticce  vieviores  disciplince, 
vestrce  rehgioiiis  vigorem  non  mimis  mine  in  eonsidendo  quam  antea, 
etim  pronuneiaretis,  vera  ratione  firniastis,  qui  ad  nostrum  referen- 
dum approbastis  esse  judicium,  scientes,  quid  Apostolicce  Sedi.  .  .  . 
debeatur.  Ep.  30,  n.  2,  p.  896  :  Diligenter  ergo  et  congrue  aposto- 
lici  consulitis  honoris  arcana  (honoris  inquam  ilHus,  quern  praeter  ilia, 
quae  sunt  extrinsecus,  sollicitiido  manet  omnhun  ecclesiariim)  super 
anxiis  rebns  qu(2  sittenenda  sententia:  a ntu/tca  scilicet  regulceformam 

secttti,  quatn  toto  semper  ab  orbe  mecum  nostis  esse  servatam 

Quid  id  etiam  actione firviastis,  nisi  scientes  quod  per  ovutes  prrovincias 
de  apostolico  fonte  petentibus  responsa  sanper  emanent  ?  Pricsertim 
qiioties  fidei  ratio  z-entilaticr,  arbitror  omnes  fratres  et  coepiscopos 
nostros  nonnisi  ad  Petrum,  ?>.,  sui  nominis  et  honoris  auctorem, 
re/err e  debere.,  &c.  Ep.  37,  n.  I,  p.  910  .  Mirari  non  possumus 
dilectionem  tuam  sequi  instittita  majoriun,  omniaque,  qua;  possunt 
recipere  aliquam  dubitationem,  ad  nos  quasi  ad  caput  atque  ad 
apicem  episcopatics  refer  re,  ut  consulta  videlicet  Sedes  Apostolica  ex 
ipsis  rebus  dubüs  certum  aliquid  faciendum  pronunciet. 

•*^  Cone.  Sardic,  ep.  ad  Jul.,  n.  i,  p.  395,  Const.:  Hoc  enim 
optimum  et  valde  congruentissimum  esse  videbitur,  si  adcaput^  id 
esty  ad  Petri  Apostoli  Sedem,  de  singulis  quibusque  provinciis 
Domini  referant  sacerdotes.  Cone.  Milevit,  anno  416,  ad  Innoc.  I., 
ep.  27,  n.  I,  p.  873  :  Quia  te  Dominus  gratice  suae  praecipuo  munere 
in  Sede  Apostolica  coUocavit,  talemque  nostris  temporibus  prtestitit, 
ut  nobis  potius  ad  culpam  negligentioe  valeat,  si  apud  tuam  venera- 
tionem  quae  pro  ecclesid  suggerenda  sunt,  tacuerimus,  quam  ea  tu 
])ossis  vel  fastidiose  vel  negligenter  accipere,  magnis  periculis  in- 
firmorum  membrorum  Christi  pastoralem  diligentiam  adhibere 
digneris.  Cone.  Ephes.  ep.  ad  Coelestin.  Papam.  (ep.  20,  n.  i,  p. 
1 165)  :  iireior)  expv"  onravTa  eh  yvQxxiv  ttJs  (r??s  baiörriTos  avev^- 
xdrjvai  TO.  irapaKoKovdrjaavTa  ;  since  it  was  necessary  that  all  the 
things  which  have  ensued  should  be  brought  to  the  knowledge  of 
thy  Holiness. 

^  Cyrill  of  Alexandria  writes  in  the  year  430  to  Pope  Celestine 
(Caslest.  ep.  8,  p.  1085,  Const.)  that  he  would  have  observed  silence, 
could  he  have  lawfully  done  so,  and  had  it  not  been  his  duty  to 
write  to  the  Pope  upon  existing  controversies,  especially  in  matters 
of  faith  ;  but  old  ecclesiastical  usage  requires  (rd  fx.aKpä  tQu  e/c- 
K\rj<nQv  idi])  that  he  should  make  a  report  thereon  to  his  Holiness. 
From  the  Pope  he  wishes  to  have  the  decision.     (N.  7,  p.  1093.) 


1 1 8     The  Primacy  and  its  Development. 

The  elder  Protestants  wished  to  make  Gregory 
VII.  the  first  real  Pope ;  the  later  ones  wished  to 
make  Nicholas  I.  ;  others,  again,  Gregory  I.;  while 
the  moderns  make  Leo  the  Great.  But  we  are 
ever  carried  back  to  a  higher  antiquity  :  what  we 
find  said  by  and  in  Leo,  may  be  already  shown,  as 
far  as  our  documents  reach,  to  be  the  language  of 
his  predecessors.  But  we  must  ever  keep  in  view, 
that  the  primacy  was  never  as  a  ready-made 
system  traced  out  for  the  constitution  of  the 
ancient  Church,  but  was  deposited  in  it  like  a 
fructifying  germ,  which  developed  with  the  life  of 
the  Church.  Hence,  we  ought,  says  Ferdinand 
Walter,  from  whom  we  borrow  this  passage,  not  so 
represent  the  circumstances  of  the  case  as  if  the 
Roman  see  had  clearly  foreseen  all  for  which  it  was 
destined,  and  did,  as  it  were,  but  watch  the  oppor- 
tunity for  bringing  it  to  a  consummation.  Its 
task  was  rather  prescribed  to.  it  by  the  circum- 
stances and  by  the  demands  of  the  Church  ;  and 
hence,  with  the  growth  of  the  whole  body,  the 
primacy  came  out  in  more  distinct  outlines.'*" 
''  The  Divine  Founder  of  the  Church,"  says  George 
Phillips,  "  has  defined  the  rights  of  his  vicegerent 
on  earth  only  in  general  traits,  and  not  in  minute 
particulars.  According  to  the  will  of  providence, 
the  primacy  was  to  enter  on  the  dom.ain  of  history. 
Hence,  it  could  not  be  circumscribed  within  exact 
and  sharply-defined  limits,  but  must  be  allowed 
such  2l  freedom  of  movement  3.nd  of  development,  as 
would   enable   it   to  enforce   in    every  sphere  its 

A  Vitus  of  Vienne  writes  (ep.  36)  :  Scitis  Synodalium  legum  esse, 
ut  in  rebus,  quae  ad  Ecclesise  statum  pertinent,  si  quid  dubitationis 
fuerit  exortum,  ad  Romanae  ecclesia  maximum  sacerdotem  quasi  ad 
caput  nostrum  membra  sequentia  recurramus. 

^^  Justinian.  I.,  ad  Job.  II.,  ep.  3,  n.  3,  L.  7,  Cod.  I.,  i.     Marciau 
Imp.  in  ep.  76,  100,  no,  Leon.  M. 


The  Primacy  and  its  Development.      1 1 9 

divinepower,accordingtothevariouscircumstances, 
and  the  special  needs  of  different  ages.  With  this 
predetermination,  Christ  made  Peter  the  Apostle 
the  foundation-stone  of  His  Church,  and  endowed 
him  with  the  three  prerogatives  of  royalty,  the  teach- 
ing office,  and  the  high-priesthood.  He  has  hereby 
conferred  on  him  the  plenary,  the  supreme,  and 
the  regular  power,  immediately  relating  to  the 
whole  Church." '^^ 

It  is  a  thoroughly  false  view  to  concede  to  the 
Church  the  principle  of  development,  and,  on  the 
other  hand,  to  prescribe  to  the  Papal  primacy  a 
point  of  development  beyond  which  it  must  not 
go ;  and  this  without  any  regard  to  the  historical 
expansion  of  the  Eastern  Patriarchates,  which 
extended  their  power  even  over  countries  for  whose 
subjection  no  more  ancient  title  existed  ;  while  the 
Bishop  of  Rome,  as  patriarch  of  the  West,  had 
converted  to  Christianity  almost  the  whole  South, 
West,  and  North  of  Europe,  and  founded  countless 
filial  churches."^"^  And  these  were  brought  into  no 
greater  state  of  dependence  than  that  in  which  the 
Eastern  churches  had,  from  a  very  early  period, 
stood  in  relation  to  the  patriarchs.  If  we  had  to 
deal  with  another  opponent  than  Janus,  we  should 


"*•*  Phillips's  Canon  Law,  vol,  v.,  §  201,  p.  6.  The  copious  treat- 
ment of  the  subject  in  this  work  may  be  strongly  recommended  to 
the  reader. 

•"  Innoc.  I.,  ep.  25,  ad  Decent.,  n.  2,  p.  856,  ed.  Coust.  :  cum 
sit  manifestum  in  omnem  Italiam,  Gallias,  Hispanias,  Africam 
atque  Siciliam  et  insulas  interjacentes  nullum  instituisse  ecclesias, 
nisi  eos,  quos  venerabilis  Apostolus  Petrus  aut  ejus  successores  con- 
stituerint  sacerdotes.  Aut  legant,  si  in  his  provinciis  alius  Apos- 
tolorum  invenitur,  aut  legitur  docuisse.  Qui  si  non  legunt,  quia 
nusquam  inveniunt,  oportet  eos  hoc  sequi,  quod  ecclesia  Eomana 
custodit,  a  qua  eo3  principium  accepisse  non  dubium  est.  Of  Ire- 
land, Germany,  Scandinavia,  as  well  as  of  the  Anglo-Saxons  in 
England,  it  is  besides  known  that  they  received  the  gospel  from 
Rome. 


1 20     The  Primacy  and  its  Development. 

have  endeavoured  to  distinguish  between  the 
primatial  and  the  patriarchal  rights  of  the  Church 
of  Rome.  Here  we  confine  ourselves  to  that  which 
must  needs  be  stated  in  reply  to  our  opponent. 
The  latter,  "  in  order  to  show  the  enormous  dif- 
ference in  the  position  and  action  of  the  primacy, 
as  it  was  in  the  Roman  empire,  and  as  it  became 
in  the  later  Middle  Ages  "  (p.  Tj),  points  out  to  his 
readers  ten  facts,  which  require  our  minute  examin- 
ation. 

(i.)  ''The  Popes  took  no  part  in  convoking 
councils.  All  great  councils,  to  which  bishops 
came  from  different  countries,  were  convoked  by 
the  Emperors,  nor  were  the  Popes  ever  consulted 
about  it  beforehand  "  (p.  yy).  Doubtless,  the  first 
eight  CEcumenical  Councils  were  convoked  by  the 
emperors.'*^  This  was  rendered  necessary  for  ensur- 
ing the  safety,  under  the  circumstances  of  the  times, 
and  for  facilitating  the  journeys  of  the  bishops, 
who  made  use  of  the  imperial  posts."^^  Then 
again  this  intervention  was  unavoidable  on  account 
of  the  territorial  power  of  the  emperors  and  of 
their  general  influence  ;'*^  so  even  Pope  Liberius 
was  obliged  to  request  the  convocation  of  a  synod 
from  the  Emperor  Constantius."^^  That,  however, 
in  the  convocation  of  such  Councils  the  popes 
took  no  part,  is  utterly  untrue.  Many  of  the  acts 
relating  to  these  Councils  have  been  lost ;  but  of  the 
fourth  Council westill  possess  numerous  documents, 

45  Hefele  Cone.  I.,  p  7.  Phillips's  Canon  Law,  II.,  §  84,  p.  238, 
et  seq. 

'^  In  reference  to  the  Synods  so  frequent  under  Constantius, 
Ammianus  Marcellinus  (xxi.  16)  complains  that  the  vehicles  (res 
vehicularia)  were  almost  ruined;  and  Hilary  (Fragm.  iii.,  op. 
hist.,  n.  25)  says,  Currus  ipse  publicus  attritus  ad  nihilum  perdu- 
citur. 

"^  Cf.  Bellarm.  de  Concil.  I.,  13.     Bennettis,  P.  II.,  t.  III.,  p. 

154. 
48  Liber.,  ep.  4,  pp.  423-427,  ed.  Const. 


The  Primacy  and  its  Development.      1 2 1 

which  prove  the  negotiations  carried  on  on  this  sub- 
ject by  the  Emperor  Marcian  with  Pope  Leo  L,  and 
the  share  of  the  latter  in  this  business."^^  Not  long 
after  the  holding  of  this  Council,  the  bishops  of 
Moesia  wrote,  "  that  it  had  been  by  the  command 
of  Pope  Leo,  who  was  truly  the  head  of  bishops, 
convened."  ^°  The  sixth  General  Council  expressly 
asserts  of  the  first,  that  it  was  assembled  by  the 
Emperor  Constantine  and  by  Pope  Sylvester  ;  and 
data  from  other  sources  coincide  in  this  state- 
ment.^' That  Innocent  I.,  in  the  affairs  of  Chry- 
sostom,  and  Leo  L,  after  the  Latrocinum  of 
Ephesus,  applied  to  the  court  of  Constantinople 
for  the  convocation  of  Synods,  is  easily  explained 
from  the  indispensable  need  of  imperial  co-opera- 
tion. In  some  cases  the  popes  took  the  initiative, 
in  others  the  emperors,  who  then  assured  them- 
selves of  the  papal  sanction,  as  occurred  in  the 
sixth,  seventh,  and  eighth  General  Councils ;  and, 
as  may  be  proved,  was  the  case  with  the  third  also. 
The  second  CEcumenical  Synod  of  the  year  381, 
was  originally  but  a  General  Council  of  the  Greek 
Church.  Respecting  the  summoning  of  the  fifth 
General  Council,  the  Emperor  Justinian  negotiated 
with  Pope  Vigilius.^^  But  soon  after  this  Synod, 
Pope  Pelagius  II.  could  claim  the  convocation  of 
CEcumenical  Councils  as  a  privilege  of  his  see.^^ 

(2.)  "  The  popes  also  were  not  always  allowed 
to  preside  personally,  or  by  deputy,  at  the  great 
Councils,  though  no    one  denied    them  the   first 


^^  Hefele,  loc.  cit.,  p.  lo,  et  seq. 

50  Hard.,  Cone.  IL,  710. 

51  Hard.  IH.  141 7.     Hefele,  loc.  cit.,  p.  256,  seq. 
°-  Hefele,  I.,  p.  9,  11-13. 

53  Pelag.  II.,  ep.  6,  ad  Orient. :  cum  generalium  synodorum  con- 
vocandi  auctoritas  Apostolicae  Sedi  B.  Petri  singulari  privilegio  sit 
tradita,  et  nulla  unquam  synodus  rata  legatur,  quse  apostolica 
auctoritate  non  fuerit  fulta. 


12  2      The  Primacy  and  its  Development. 

rank  [the  rank  merely  ?]  in  the  Church.  Only 
at  Chalcedon,  in  the  year  451,  and  at  Constanti- 
nople in  680,  did  the  papal  legates  preside "  (pp. 

77,  7S). 

But  the  papal  privilege  appears  an  undisputed 
one,  and  the  two  Synods  referred  to  too  clearly 
show  the  importance  of  that  privilege — a  privilege 
which  Janus  quickly  passes  over.  In  the  second 
General  Council,  there  could  not  be,  from  the  reason 
already  alleged,  any  question  of  the  exercise  of  this 
right.  At  the  fifth  Council,  Pope  Vigilius,  though 
most  respectfully  invited  by  a  brilliant  deputation, 
headed  by  the  Oriental  patriarchs,  refused,  by 
reason  of  the  non-fulfilment  of  the  stipulated  con- 
ditions, to  take  part  in  its  proceedings.^"^  Even 
before  this  Synod,  this  papal  privilege  was  undis- 
puted. Macedonius  II.,  patriarch  of  Constanti- 
nople (who  flourished  from  the  year  496  to  511), 
declared,  when  desired  by  the  Emperor  Anastasius 
to  condemn  the  Council  of  Chalcedon,  that  such  a 
step,  without  an  CEcumenical  Synod  presided  over 
by  the  Pope,  was  impossible  ;  and  this  emperor, 
though  strongly  inclined  towards  the  heretics,  very 
well  knew  that  the  presidency  of  the  Pope  was 
necessary,  when  he  promised  to  let  a  General 
Council  be  held  at  Heraclea,  but  which  afterwards 
failed. ^^  At  Ephesus,  Cyril,  patriarch  of  Alexan- 
dria, to  whom  Celestine  had  previously  delegated 
his  authority,  presided  with  the  papal  legates 
afterwards   sent.^^     Here,  too,  the    power   of  the 


5-*  Hefele,  p.  8,  IL  43. 

^5  Theophan.  Chronogr.,  pp.  234,  242,  346,  seq.  Theod.,  Lect. 
II.  24,     Cedren.  I.,  632.    Malal.  L.  xvi.  p.  596.    Marcellin.  Chron., 

a.  514,  515- 

^^  Coelestin.,  ep.  Ii,  ad  Cyrill.,  n.  4,  p.  1105.  Coust.  :  avva- 
(pdeiarjs  col  tt]S  avdeprias  tov  i]fj.€T€pou  dpövov  .  .  .  ra^/Trjv  iKßLßdaeis 
äKpiß^L  areppÖTTjTi  rrjv  äTr6<paaiu.     Cf.  ep.  14,  n.  8,  p.  1145-     "The 


The  Primacy  and  its  Dcvclopincnt.      1 2  ^ 


0 


Roman  See  was  brilliantly  displayed.  Its  legates 
were  appointed  to  execute  its  decrees,  and  charged 
to  show  themselves,  not  as  contending  parties,  but 
as  judges.^^  Bishop  Firmus  characterized  the 
epistle  of  the  Pope  as  the  rule  of  the  Assembly  ;^^ 
and  that  Assembly  itself  declared  that  it  was  bound 
by  this  epistle,  as  well  as  by  the  Canons,  to  pro- 
ceed to  the  deposition  of  Nestorius.^^  Of  the  first 
Nicene  Council,  we  know  that  Bishop  Hosius  and 
two  Roman  priests,  in  their  quality  of  papal  repre- 
sentatives, first  subscribed  the  decisions  ;  and  this 
fact  is  confirmed  by  the  testimony  of  Gelasius  of 
Cyzicus,  as  well  as  by  that  of  other  witnesses.^° 
Even  by  Eusebius  the  Emperor  Constantine  is  dis- 
tinguished from  the  presidents  of  the  Council. ^^ 
The  fact  that  in  the  year  449,  at  the  Latrocinium 
of  Ephesus,  Dioscorus,  patriarch  of  Alexandria, 
setting  aside  the  papal  legates,  assumed  the  pre- 
sidency, was  afterwards,  in  the  Council  of  Chal- 
cedon,  imputed  to  him  as  a  crime.^^  The  Emperor 
Theodosius  II.,  in  his  embarrassment,  had  indeed 
committed  to  that  patriarch  the  conduct  of  the 
deliberations  ;  but  from  the  fact  that  Leo  still  sent 
his  deputies  to  Ephesus,  it  by  no  means  follows 
that  he  renounced  the  presidency  of  the  Council ; 
for  in  his  epistle  to  the  Synod,  convoked  for 
Ephesus,  he  emphatically  points  out  the  primacy 
of  his  See.^^    The  new  Council  was,  according  to  the 


whole  authority  of  our  see  having  been  committed  to  thee,  .  .  . 
thou  wilt  enforce  this  decision  with  a  firm  exactitude." — Tr. 

5^  Coelestin.,  ep.  17,  p.  1152.  Coust.  Mansi.  IV.  556.  Cf.  Eph. 
Cone,  act.  ii.,  ibidem,  p.  1287. 

58  Cone.  Ephes,,  act.  ii.     Mansi,  loc.  cit.,  p.  12S7-1290. 

•'^  Ibid.,  Act.  iii.,  p.  1295. 

6"  Hefele  L,  p.  32-38. 

«1  Eus.  Vita.  Const.  III.  13. 

«■-  Hefele  I.  p.  6,  seq.  38.     Mansi  VI.  581.     Hard.  II.  68. 

'^^^  Leo  M.,  ep.  33,  ad  Synod  Ephes.,  c.  i. 


1 24      TJie  Primacy  and  its  Development. 

express  words  of  the  Emperor  Marcian,  to  be  held 
under  the  direct  guidance  of  the  Pope.^"^  The  pre- 
sidency of  his  representatives  Leo  several  times 
mentions  ;  ^^  and  the  Council  of  Chalcedon  writes 
to  him,  that,  by  his  vicars,  he  presided  over  all,  as 
the  head  over  the  members.^^ 

(3.)  "  Neither  the  dogmatic  nor  the  disciplinary 
decisions  of  these  Councils  required  papal  confir- 
mation, for  their  force  and  authority  depended  on 
the  consent  of  the  Church  as  expressed  in  the 
Synod,  and  afterwards  on  the  fact  of  their  being 
generally  received  "  (p.  jZ). 

To  this  assertion  many  facts  are  opposed  :  first, 
the  letter  of  the  Synod  of  Chalcedon  to  Pope  Leo, 
with  the  request  for  confirmation,  followed  by  an- 
other from  the  Emperor  Marcian,  which  solicited  a 
document  of  approval  to  be  made  known  to  all  the 
churches  ;  ^^  secondly,  the  request  of  the  Synod  of 
680  to  the  Pope,  wherein  it  is  said  :  '*  The  brilliant 
light  of  the  true  Faith  we  have  clearly  announced 
with  thee  ;  and  we,  therefore,  earnestly  request  thy 
paternal  Holiness  to  confirm  this  anew  by  thy 
venerable  decrees  ;"  and  to  this  request  Leo  II. 
responded  ;  ^^  thirdly,  the  efforts  of  the  Emperor 
Justinian  to  procure  from  Pope  Vigilius  the  confir- 
mation of  the  fifth  Council,  and  this  was  at  last 
granted  by  the  Pope  ;  fourthly,  the  repeated 
attempts  of  the  Emperor  Justinian  IL  to  obtain 

^^  (xov  aiOevTouPTOs.     Leo,  ep.  73. 

^  Ep.  89,  Marcian  Im.,  praedictum  patrem  et  coepiscopum  vice 
meä  Synodo  convenit  praesidere.  Ep.  93,  ad  Synod,  c.  I.  In  his 
fratribus  .  .  .  me  Synodo  vestra  fraternitas  sestimet  prsesidere. 

^^  Leo,  ep.  98,  c,  i.  p.  1089,  1090,  ed.  Ball. 

^^  Ep.  cit.  c.  4,  p.  1099,  ep.  no,  Marc.  p.  1183,  se^.  Tua 
pietas  literas  mittere  dignabitur  per  quas  omnibus  populis  et 
ecclesiis  manifestmn  fiat  in  sancta  Synodo  peracta  a  tua  Beatitudine 
rata  haberi. 

^^  Hard.  III.  1632-1469.     Hefele,  Cone.  p.  43. 

•'^  Hefele,  Cone,  ii.,  p.  881,  set/.;  iii.  p.  315,  se//. 


TJie  Primacy  and  its  Drjclop)iicjä.     125 

from  Rome  the  approval  of  the  Council  in  Trullo, 
held  in  692,  but  which  found  there  no  rccoc^ni- 
tion,  and  which,  therefore,  no  theologian  will  desif^- 
nate,  with  Janus  (p.  157),  an  Oecumenical  Synod. 
When  the  forged  confirmation  of  the  first  Nicene 
Council  by  Pope  Sylvester  is  alleged,  we  must  still 
remember  that,  independently  of  our  false  records, 
which,  in  all  probability,  owed  their  origin  only  to 
the  generally  known  fact ;  that  fact  itself  is  attested 
by  forty  Italian  bishops,  at  a  Synod  in  the  year 
485,  as  well  as  by  the  very  sober  and  prudent 
Dionysius  Exiguus.^°  A  synodical  letter  of  Pope 
Damasus  had  already  declared  that  the  Council  of 
Rimini,  with  all  its  number  of  bishops,  could  have 
no  weight,  when  neither  the  Roman  Bishop,  whose 
sentence  was  above  all  to  be  waited  for,^'  nor  Vin- 
centius  of  Capua,  and  other  bishops  had  given  in 
their  adhesion.  This  right  of  confirmation  is 
expressed  by  Pope  Gelasius  in  a  very  definite 
manner.^''  And  even  the  Greeks  recognize  as  a 
rule,  that  without  the  Romans  no  synodical  decree 
has  legal  force  ;"  that  on  the  Pope  depends  the 

^'  Ibid.,  I.,  p.  40,  41,  421,  seq.;  425,  seq. 

'^^  ov  Tr\v  yvdjfxrjv  wpö  irävTwv  ibei  eKdi^aadai.  Theodoret,  H.  E., 
L.  ii.  c.  17,  al  22.  Constant,  p.  485.  Compare  the  words  of  Pope 
Julius  in  note  19  above. 

^2  Gelas,  I.  ep.  ad  Episc.  Dard.  :  Quce  (sedes  prima)  et  unam- 
quamque  synodum  sua  auctoritate  confirmat,  et  continuatä  modera- 
tione  custodit.  Tom.  de  anathem.  vinculo.  Totum  in  sedis 
Apostolicse  positum  est  potestate  :  ita  quod  firmavit  in  synodo 
sedes  Apostolica,  hoc  robur  obtinuit,  quod  refutavit,  habere  non 
potuit  firmitatem. 

""^  Niceph.  Cpl.  pro.  s.  imag.c.  25  (Mai  N.  Bibl.  pp.  ii,  30.  Migne 
C,  p.  597);  wi' (the  Romans  presiding  in  the  seventh  Council), 
avev  86y/xa  Kara  ttjj'  iKKXrjaiau  Kivovfxevow  decTfiois  KavoviKols  kuI  iepa- 
TLKoh  ^deaLv  pevofiicrßevov  ävwdeu  ttju  boKiixaaiav  ov  crxoirj  7)  Se^air  &u 
TroT€TT}v  TrepaidJCTLv,  ihs  Stj  \ax6vTcov  Kara  rrjv  lepuicrvvTjv  i^apx^iv  Kai  tojv 
Kopv(j)ai(j3v  ev  aTTOffToXois  €yKex^t.pi(Tp.^vu}v  t6  d^itj/xa.  Without  whom 
(the  Romans  presiding  in  the  seventh  Council)  a  doctrine  brought 
forward  in  the  Church  could  not,  even  though  confirmed  by  canon- 
ical decrees  and  by  ecclesiastical  usage,  ever  obtain  full  approval 


1 26     The  Primacy  and  its  Development. 

validity  of  Oecumenical  Synods  ;^^  and  that  it  is 
no  detriment  to  a  General  Council,  if  the  Oriental 
patriarchs  be  absent,  provided  that  the  apostolic 
Pope  in  Rome  concur  in  its  decisions,  and  be  there 
represented  by  his  legates/^ 

(4.)  "  For  the  first  thousand  years  no  Pope  ever 
issued  a  doctrinal  decision,  intended  for,  and  ad- 
dressed to  the  whole  Church"  (p.  'jZ).  The  re- 
verse of  this  we  have  already  seen.  Leo's  letter 
to  Flavian  is  (p.  69)  called  only  the  first  dogmatic 
document  of  a  Pope  ;  but  this  letter  was  pubHshed 
throughout  the  whole  Church,  and  already,  before 
the  Council  of  Chalcedon,  was  subscribed  by  the 
bishops  of  the  East  and  West/^  Such  decisions 
we  have,  further,  from  Popes  Damasus,  Innocent, 
and  Zosimus,  which  we  have  already  adduced,  as 
well  as  from  Siricius  against  Jovinian  (p.  72). 
When  Pope  Siricius  did  not  wish  to  issue  a  decision 
respecting  Bishop  Bonosus,  for  which  the  lUyrian 
prelates  subject  to  his  patriarchate  had  "  vel  pro 
veritate  vel  pro  modestia "  requested  him  ;  he  by 
no  means  absolutely  said  that  "  he  had  no  right  to 
take  such  a  step,"  but  he  wished  to  preserve  in  the 
first  place  the  jurisdiction  in  the  first  instance  of 
the  neighbouring  bishops,  as  established  by  the 
Synod  of  Capua. ^^     The  second  Synod  of  Orange, 

or  currency.  For  it  is  they  (the  Roman  Pontiffs)  who  have  had 
assigned  to  them  the  rule  in  sacred  things,  and  who  have  received 
into  their  hands  the  dignity  of  headship  among  the  Apostles. 

7-*  Theod.  Stud  .L.  II.,  ep.  129,  p.  1420  :  (^  (rep  e/c  5i/o-ews)  koX 
rh  Kpdros  duacp^pfrai  ttjs  olKOv/j.eviKT]s  avvödov,  "  cui  (Episcopo 
Romano)  et  potestas  summa  defertur  Synodi  CEcumenicse  "  (tr.  Jac. 
Sismondi.) 

75  Cone,  vii.,  ap.  Mansi.  xii.,  1 134.  Cf.  Thomassin.  de  vet.  et 
nova  Eccl.  disciphna.     P.  I.,  L.  i,  c.  13,  n.  6 ;  c.  14,  n.  8. 

76  Hefele  II.,  Pp.  374,  378,  se^.,  385,  388. 

77  Let  us  attend  to  the  addition  in  Siricius,  ep.  9,  p.  680,  ed. 
Coustant  .  .  .  .  :  Nam  si  Integra  esset  hodie  synodus,  recte  .... 
decerneremus  ;  and  Constant's  note  d.  Cf.  Bennettis,  op.  cit.,  P. 
IL,  torn,  iii.,  p.  175. 


TJlc  Primacy  and  its  Dcvelopjucnt.      i  2  7 

in  the  affair  of  the  Masslllians  in  529,  found  general 
recognition  only  by  the  confirmation  of  Pope 
Boniface  II.  in  the  year  531,  although  its  decrees 
were  for  the  most  part  made  up  of  judgments  sent 
by  Pope  Felix  IV/^  They  passed  for  a  general 
standard  of  doctrine  ;  and  it  is  by  no  means  true 
that  Papal  decisions  then  only  obtained  that 
character,  "  when  they  had  been  read,  examined, 
and  approved  at  an  (Ecumenical  Council  "  (p.  'j'^). 
This  refers  particularly  "  to  the  careful  examina- 
tion" of  the  above-mentioned  dogmatic  letter  of 
Leo  I.  to  Flavian  (p.  47).  But  it  is  right  to 
observe  that  this  letter  was  immediately,  on  its 
first  reading  in  the  second  session  of  Chalcedon, 
greeted  amid  joyful  acclamations,  as  the  rule  of 
faith  ("  Peter  hath  spoken  by  the  mouth  of  Leo," 
and  so  forth) ;  and  it  was  only  afterwards,  when 
some  less  informed  bishops  expressed  certain 
doubts,  which  were  completely  set  aside  even  in 
the  fourth  session,  a  more  minute  inquiry  took 
place.^^  Accordingly,  theologians  regard  this  as 
a  mere  cxamcii  elucidationis,  and  not  as  an  exainc7i 
7'cvisionis^  in  the  same  way  as  the  Council  of  Basle 
examined  the  decree  of  Constance  relative  to  the 
use  of  the  chalice.^°  That  Leo  the  Great  himself 
acknowledged,  his  decree  first  needed  a  confirma- 
tion by  the  bishops,  before'  it  could  become  a 
fixed  rule  of  faith,  is  certainly  not  to  be  inferred 
from  his  correspondence  with  the  prelates  of 
Gaul.^'     The  signatures  of  bishops  were  required 

78  Mansi.  VIII.,  735.     Hefelell.,  705,  716, 

7^  Hefele  II.,  422,  seq. ;  435,  seq. 

8"  Bennettis,  P.  I.,  t.  i.,  p.  173,  seq.  Card.  Gerdil  Esame  dell' 
opposizione  alia  Bolla  ^«r/^rt-;;/ yfi/^/ (Examination  of  the  motives 
of  opposition  to  the  Bull  Auctorem  Fidei),  P.  IL,  §  ii.  0]i.  xiv., 
pp.  191-210.  Ca;v/. Z///a  Lettere,  23.  Zaccaria  Antifebronio,  P.  IL, 
P-  336,  scq. 

^^  Leo   (ep.  67,   p.  looi,    Ball.,    p.    SS6,    ed.    Migne)  gave  the 


1 28      The  Primacy  and  its  Development. 

for  a  full  security  against  the  further  spread  of 
the  heresy  which  had  sprung  up  in  the  East,  but 
not  for  a  confirmation  of  the  dogma  itself ;  for  the 
consent  of  all  to  the  decree  issued  is  demanded  by 
every  CEcumenical  Council.  "  But  Pope  Celestine  s 
condemnation  of  Nestorius  was  superseded"  (in 
the  eye  of  the  Church  ?)  "  by  the  emperor's  con- 
voking a  General  Council  at  Ephesus"  (p.  71).  The 
fathers  of  Ephesus,  however,  did  not  think  so, 
when,  as  we  saw  above,  they  declared  themselves 
forced  by  the  letter  of  Pope  Celestine  to  pronounce 
an  identical  sentence  ;  and  when  they  deemed  the 
matter  decreed  by  the  Pope  as  by  no  means 
invalid.  The  reading  of  other  dogmatic  testi- 
monies also,  by  no  means  proves  that  a  confirma- 
tion was  enunciated  only  after  a  formal  revision. 

Against  the  Papal  power  it  is  further  alleged  : 
"  Never,  during  the  first  nine  centuries,  had  the 
Popes  ever  once  made  even  the  attempt  to  gather 
about  them  a  great  synod  of  bishops  from  dif- 
ferent countries"  (p.  190).  But  yet  such  an  attempt 
Agatho  made,  who  summoned  to  his  Roman 
synod  even  the  Frankish,  English,  and  other  pre- 
lates ;  Stephen  III.,  who  in  the  year  769  held  his 
Lateran  synod  with  fifty-three  bishops,  among 
whom  were  twelve  Frankish  prelates ;  and,  lastly, 
Nicholas  I.,  who  in  Z^'j  had  entertained  the  idea 
of  assembling  all  the  bishops  of  the  West  in  order 
to   deliberate   on   the   charges   preferred    by   the 

notice,  the  Bishops  (ep.  68)  thanked  the  Pope  for  his  paternal  care, 
and  uttered  praises  on  the  letter,  c.  I,  p.  888.  Magna  et  ineflfa:)ili 
quadam  nos  peculiares  tui  gratulatione  succrescimus,  quod  ilia 
specialis  doctrinae  vestrse  pagina  ita  per  omnium  Ecclesiarum  con- 
venticula  celebratur,  ut  vere  consona  omnium  sententia  declaretur, 
merito  illic  principatum  sedis  apostolica;  constitutum,  unde  adhuc 
apostolici  spiritus  oracula  ("  the  odious  oracles,"  Janus,  p.  45^,  rese- 
rentur.  Cf.  ep.  99,  c.  2,  ep.  102,  103.  Upon  the  letter  to  Theo- 
doret,  vide  Beimettis,  loc.  cit.,  p.  1 78,  seq. 


The  Primacy  and  its  Development.      1 29 

Greeks.^"  The  assembling  of  an  (Ecumenical 
Council  at  Rome  was  not  agreeable  to  the  imperial 
court  of  Constantinople,  and  from  regard  to  this 
court  the  project  could  scarcely  be  entertained. 
Moreover,  the  history  of  the  Western  Kingdoms 
points  to  the  many  difficulties  which  opposed  the 
convocation  of  the  greater  synods. 

From  the  relation  of  Popes  to  Councils,  Janus 
turns  to  the  definition   of  their  other  ri<7hts  and 

o 

powers. 

"  The  Popes  possessed  none  of  the  three 
powers  which  are  the  proper  attributes  of  sove- 
reignty— neither  the  legislative,  the  administrative, 
nor  the  judicial"  (p.  'j'^).  Hitherto  we  have  be- 
lieved that  these  three  powers  were  already  com- 
prised in  the  office  of  Peter,  involved  in  the  very 
idea  of  the  Papal  supremacy,  and  exercised  long 
before  the  times  of  pseudo-Isidore.  We  must  now, 
so  it  appears,  correct  not  only  the  manuals  of  canon 
law,^^  but  those  of  Church  history  also.^"^  But 
what  we  have  hitherto  discovered  in  Janus  bids 
us  look  beforehand  somewhat  more  carefully  into 
this  matter. 

I.  As  regards  more  immediately  the  supreme 
judicial  power,  Janus  well  knows  (p.  79)  that  the 
Council  of  Sardica  can  be  opposed  to  him  ;  but  to 
this  he  is  prepared  to  offer  several  objections.  In 
the  first  place,  the  judgment  on  bishops,  in  the 
second  and  third  instance,  was  committed  only  to 
the  person  of  the  then  Pope,  Julius  ;  and,  secondly, 
neither  the  Eastern  Church  nor  the  African  ever 
received  this  regulation.  The  first  objection  is, 
however,   solved,    if  we  compare  with   the    third 

8-  Hefele  Cone.  III.,  227,  seq.,  403  ;  IV.  349.  Vide  Bennettis, 
L.  i-,  p-  250,  seq. 

83  Phillips's  Canon  Law,  I.,  §  1 1,  seq.  ;  v.  §  201,  seq. 
^^  Dollinger's  Manual  of  Church  History,  L,  p.  177,  seq.,  §  40. 

I 


130      The  Primacy  and  its  Development, 

canon  of  Sardica — where  Julius  is  named — the  two 
following  ones,  having  material  connexion  there- 
with, but  which  are  passed  over  by  Janus,  and  that 
make  express  mention  of  the  Bishop  of  Rome.^^ 
The  second  objection,  as  to  the  non-acceptance  of 
the  regulation  on  the  part  of  the  Orientals,  was 
long  ago  refuted  by  Pope  Nicholas  I.  John  Scho- 
lasticus  admitted  these  canons  into  his  collection 
of  ecclesiastical  laws  ;  the  Council  in  TruUo,  in 
the  year  692,  names  the  two  canons  expressly  ; 
Photius  inserted  them  in  his  Nomocanon,  and 
many  Greeks  have  appealed  to  them.^^  The 
African  Church  took  offence  at  these  canons  being 
designated  from  Rome  as  Nicene ;  and  to  this 
mistake  the  arrangement  of  the  more  ancient  col- 
lections of  ecclesiastical  law  (p.  122)  had  led.  It 
opposed,  on  weighty  practical  grounds,  the  appeal 
of  a  mere  priest,  like  Apiarius,  but  by  no  means 
assailed  the  Pope's  judicial  power  in  general  ;^^ 
a  power  which  Augustine,  particularly  in  his  letter 
on  Bishop  Anthony  of  Fuscala,  while  alleging 
even  earlier  examples,  decidedly  recognized. ^^ 
Numerous  precedents  of  appeals^^  refute  the  asser- 
tion, that  before  pseudo-Isidore  the  ordinance  of 
Sardica    did    not    come    into    force.     Chrysostom 

^^  Hefele,  i.  549,  550.     Phillips's  Can.  Law,  v.  §  216,  p.  262,  seq. 

^^  Nicol.  I.  ep,  6.  Mansi  xv.  p.  174,  seq.  In  regard  to  collec- 
tions of  Canon  Law,  see  Joh.  SchoL,  tit.  16.  Voell.  etjtistell.  Bibl., 
Jur.  Can.,  ii.,  p.  537,  seq.  Piira  Juris  Gr.  eccl.  monum.,  ii.  377, 
380.    Ballerini  dQ  Ant.  Can.  Collect.,  P.i.  c.  6.    Phillips,  p.  272,  seq. 

^'^  Phillips,  §  217,  p.  274,  seq.  Hefele,  ii.  107,  120,  seq.  Döllin- 
ger,  loc.  cit,  p.  186,  seq.  The  English  writers,  Mr  Allies  and 
Bishop  Ullathorne,  also  concur  in  the  results  obtained  from  recent 
researches.     Vide  Joia-nal  of  Theol.  Lite^-atiire,  p.  522,  seq.,  1866. 

^**_Aug.  ep.  209,  seq.  Coelestini  L  ep.  I.,  p.  105 1,  seq.  Here  it 
is  said,  n.  8,  p.  1056,  Existunt  exempla,  ipsa  sede  Apostolica  jiidicante, 
vel^  alioriim  judicata  firtnante,  quosdam  pro  culpis  quibusdam  nee 
episcopal i  spoliates  honore,  nee  relictos  omnimodis  impunitos. 

^^  Phillips,  §  218,  p.  292,  seq. 


TJie  Primacy  and  its  Development,      i 


sent  epistles  and  deputies  to  Pope  Innocent  I.,  to 
obtain  from  him  speedy  correction  of  the  acts  done 
against  him,^°  and  the  annulling-  of  his  condemna- 
tion,^' as  well  as  the  chastisement  of  those  who  had 
violated  all  canonical  law.  Pope  Celestine  not 
only  passed  a  penal  sentence  against  Nestorius, 
but  quashed  even  the  judgments  pronounced  by 
that  heresiarch.^"  Boniface  I.  assumes  to  himself 
(according  to  I  Corinthians  iv.  2i)  full  penal 
jurisdiction.^^ 

2.  When,  in  respect  to  legislative  power,  it  is 
said  that  the  popes  in  those  early  times  made  no 
attempt  to  exercise  it,  we  must  first  be  permitted 
to  observe,  that  the  non-exercise  of  a  right  proves 
nothing  against  its  existence ;  that  in  general  the 
primitive  Church  had  but  few  and  simple  laws  ; 
that  the  Papacy,  for  the  most  part,  intervened 
only  in  cases  absolutely  necessary  ;  and  further, 
that  the  forms  of  legislation  were  different  at 
different  times.  First  of  all,  the  laws  were  dis- 
cussed with  the  Roman  Presbytery,  issued  at 
Synods,  or  set  forth  in  epistles  to  the  bishops  of 
different  provinces  and  countries.^'^  In  the  Papal 
answers,  too,  to  consultations  from  all  parts  of  tJie 
worldp  the  exercise  of  legislative  power  is  unmis- 


^'^  raxiaTrjv  irapaaKevdcraL  yev^crOai  rrjv  dtSpduaiv.  Innoc.  in  ep. 
4,  n.  I,  p.  773,  ed  Const.     Bennettis,  P.  ii.  t.  3,  p.  399.  set/. 

^^  The  Pope  is  to  declare,  /irjöe/xiav  ^x^"'  ^<^X^^  i^'^'-  ovtio  Trapawb- 
fius  yeyevTjfieva)  that  the  acts  thus  done  contrary  to  law  have  no  force. 
/d.  n.  7,  p.  785.     Cf.  Phillips /^r.  ci't.,  pp.  296-301. 

^^  Coelestin.,  ep.  13,  n.  5,  p.  1121  ;  n.  11,  p.  1129;  ep.  14,  n.  7, 
p.  1 145,  ed.  cit. 

^'^  Bonifac.  I.,  ep.  14,  n.  3,  p.  1038  ;  scitis,  B,  Petro  utrumque 
possibile,  id  est  in  mansuetudine  mites,  in  virga  superbos  arguere. 

^'^  Phillips,  iii.  §  152,  p.  613,  set/.,  §  253,  p.  626,  set/. 

^5  Jerome  (ep,  123,  ad  Agerruch.,  c.  10)  speaks  of  the  consulta- 
tiones  synodicee  Orientis  atque  Occidentis,  answered  by  direction  of 
Pope  Damasus.  Pope  Celestine  I.  (ep.  3,  p.  1063)  speaks  of  the 
diversa  negotia,  quae  ad  nos  ex  cunctis  veniunt  ecclesiis.    Cf.  Leo 


132      The  Primacy  and  its  Development, 

takable.  Already  Pope  Siricius  makes  mention  of 
\.\v^ gen£raliadecreta^^\^\i\Q\i  his  mediate  predecessor, 
Liberius,  after  the  rejection  of  the  Council  of  Rimini, 
dispatched  into  the  provinces;  and  he  charges  Hime- 
rius,  bishop  of  Tarragona,  to  bring  his  decrees  to 
the  knowledge  of  the  neighbouring  provinces.  His 
words, — "  What  by  a  general  sentence  we  decide 
should  be  observed  by  all  the  Churches,  and  what 
avoided,"  ^^  are  truly,  indeed,  the  words  of  a  legis- 
lator. In  like  manner,  Innocent  I.  requires  Victri- 
cius,  bishop  of  Rouen,  to  communicate  to  the 
neighbouring  bishops  the  disciplinary  regulations 
that  had  been  sent  to  him;  and  the  same  com- 
mission he  gives  to  the  patriarch  of  Antioch.  And 
in  the  same  way  Pope  Zosimus,  in  417,  acts  towards 
Patroclus,  bishop  of  Aries :  he  expresses  his  sur- 
prise to  Hesychius,  bishop  of  Salona,  that  the 
statutes  of  the  Apostolic  See  on  the  question  pro- 
posed, and  which  had  been  forwarded  to  Gaul  and 
to  Spain,  had  not  yet  reached  him.^^  Leo  the  Great 
often  "  sets  forth  the  statuta  of  the  Apostolic  See," 
and  declares  that  a  transgression  of  the  decretalia 
cojtstituta  of  Innocent  I.,  as  well  as  of  all  his  other 
predecessors,  should  be  punished  without  mercy .^^ 
The  same  had  been  already  decreed  by  Zosimus.'*"" 
Hence  the  Roman  synod,  held  under  Gelasius  I., 
declared  nothing  new  when  it  decided  "that  the 
decretal  epistles  which  the  blessed  popes  had  at 
different  times,  on  the  consultations  of  the  different 
fathers,  put  forth,"  were  to  be  received  with  all 

I.,  ep.  10,  ad  Episc.  provin.  Vienn.,  and  the  passages  cited  above 
in  note  38. 

96  Siric.  ep.  i,  ad  Himer.,  n.  2,  p.  625,  n.  20,  p.  637,  ed.  Const. 

^  Ibid.  n.  12,  p.  62,1. 

»8  Innoc.  I.,  ep.  2,  cap.  2,  p.  746,  seq.;  ep.  24,  ad  Alex.  Antioch, 
c.  4,  p.  854.     Zosim.  ep.  7,  c.  2,  p.  962  ;  ep.  9,  c.  i,  p.  968. 

99  Leo  M.,  ep.  12,  ad  Episc.  Afr.,  c.  4,  5  ;  ep.  4,  c.  5. 

1""  Zosim.,  ep.  9,  c.  4,  p.  970. 


The  Prifuacy  and  its  Development.      1 33 

rcvercncc.'°'  And  yet  the  popes  of  those  times, 
we  are  told,  made  no  attempt  to  exercise  legislative 
power.  There  was  yet,  it  is  true,  no  airia,  in  the 
later  sense  of  the  word  (p.  80)  ;  but  the  host  of 
functionaries  surrounding  the  monarch  do  not  con- 
stitute the  legislator.  Moreover,  there  was  at  Rome 
a  very  numerous  clergy:  there  were  ecclesiastical 
functionaries  of  various  grades  ;  and  under  Gregory 
the  Great,  and  long  before  him,  we  find  notaries, 
archivists,  and  defensors  or  advocates.'"^  But  very 
distinctly  the  popes  declare  that  they  have  to  bear 
the  burdens  of  all,  and  are  troubled  with  the  solici- 
tude of  all  the  Churches.^°^ 

3.  But  herein  is  involved  their  administrative 
power  also.  This  is  especially  manifest  in  the 
guidance  and  the  confirmation  of  the  principal 
bishops,  in  the  establishment  of  new  episcopal  sees, 
in  the  treatment  of  the  more  important  concerns 
having  reference  thereto.'"'^  Many  of  these  rights 
the  patriarchs  and  the  metropolitans  had  earlier 
possessed  ;  but  these  they  often  abused.  *'  It  was 
the  hierarchs  themselves,"  says  Phillips,  "who,  by 
overstepping  the  limits  assigned  to  them,  threatened 
the  Church  even  with  ruin  ;  they  would  have  given 
her  up  as  a  prey  to  the  powers  of  hell,  had  Christ, 
in  His  love  and  wisdom,  not  placed  His  Bride  upon 
a  rock.  Hence,  if  in  later  times  the  popes,  in  order 
to  save  what  was  not  yet  lost,  took  into  their  own 
hands  the  power  of  erecting  new  bishoprics,  as  well 

1"!  Gelas.  I.,  ep.  33. 

^"2  Thomassin.,  op,  cit.  P.  i.,  L.  ii.,  c.  104,  n.  r,  2,  8,  10,  ii  ; 
c.  98,  n.  2-4,  7. 

^"^  Siric,  ep.  I,  n.  I,  p.  624.  Leo  M.,  ep.  6,  c.  2  :  per  omfies 
ecclesias  cura  nostra  distenditur.  Cixlestin.,  ep.  3,  p.  1064  :  Nosqiie 
proecipue  circa  omties  cura  Constringimur,  quibus  necessitatem  de 
omtiilms  tractandi  Christus  in  S.  Petro  Ap.,  cum  illi  claves  aperi- 
endi  claudendique  daret,  indulsit. 

^^*  Causoe  majores.      Vide  Innoc.  I.,  ep.  2,  n.  6,  p.  749,  750. 


J  34     T^^^^  Primacy  and  its  Developfnent. 

as  many  other  duties  which  by  God's  ordinance 
had  been  imposed  on  them,  and  no  longer  dele- 
gated them,  as  before,  to  others,  this  was  indeed 
no  acquisition  of  new  rights,  but  nothing  more 
than  an  augmentation  of  burden,  rendered  neces- 
sary by  circumstances."  '°^  From  his  position 
as  representative  and  guardian  of  ecclesiastical 
unity,  the  pope's  right  of  superintendence  over  the 
Church  necessarily  followed. '°^  The  patriarchal 
rights  which  the  popes  possessed  in  the  west  gave 
them  powers  there,  such  as  the  patriarchs  exercised 
in  the  east,  and  over  which  the  sovereign  pontiffs 
preserved  the  supreme  jurisdiction/"^  In  many 
provinces  of  their  patriarchate,  they  appointed 
apostolic  vicars,  or  reserved  to  themselves  certain 
special  affairs/"^  Other  administrative  rights  will 
appear  from  what  follows. 

6.  "Nobody  thought  of  getting  dispensations 
from  Church  laws  from  the  Roman  bishops "  (p. 
80).  In  the  more  ancient  times,  indeed,  the  dis- 
pensations, like  the  laws,  were  of  more  rare  occur- 
rence ;  but  the  necessity  of  new  laws  led  to  the 
need  of  more  frequent  dispensations  also.  But  the 
principle  of  the  right  of  dispensation  is  involved  in 
the  very  Primacy  itself ;  and  it  was  no  subversion 
of  discipline,  that  its  exercise  should  pass  from 
bishops  to  provincial  Councils,  and  from  these  to 
the  Popes,  more  especially  as  in  the  hrst  five  cen- 
turies, and  even  in  cases  where  the  bishops  could 
grant  dispensations,  recourse  was  had  to  the  Roman 

1*^^  Phillips,  v.,  §  219,  p.  317.  Cf.  E.  Amort.  Elem.  Juris  Can,, 
t.  iii.     Diss,  v.,  n.  9. 

^"S  Ibid.  §  203,  p.  34,  seq. 

^"7  Boniface  I.  (ep.  15,  n.  6,  p.  1042,  seq.)  cites  examples,  such 
as  the  recognition  of  Nectarius,  patriarch  of  Constantinople,  at  the 
urgent  request  of  the  Emperor,  Theodosius  I.  Pope  Agapetus,  in 
the  year  536,  deposed  Anthimus  and  other  metropolitans. 

^"^  Coustant,  Prsef.  in  Epist.  Rom.  Pontif.,  n.  22,  seq.^  p.  xvii.  seq. 


TJic  Primacy  and  Us  Dcvelopjnoit.      135 

See.'°^  But  wc  have  numerous  examples  of  Papal 
dispensations  in  the  most  ancient  decretals  ex- 
tant."°  Pope  Siricius  granted  a  dispensation  to 
retain  their  orders  to  those  in  Spain,  who,  though 
public  penitents  and  bigamists,  had  been  irre- 
gularly ordained.  Like  dispensations  were  granted 
by  Innocent  I.  to  those  ordained  by  Bonosus  ;  by 
Boniface  I.  in  respect  to  the  translation  of  Bishop 
Perigenes  to  Corinth,  after  he  had  been  rejected 
by  Patras ;  by  Sixtus  III.,  with  regard  to  the 
adherents  of  Nestorius  ;  by  Leo  I.,  for  the  con- 
secration of  Anatolius,  patriarch  of  Constantinople, 
and  of  Maximus,  patriarch  of  Antioch  ;  and,  lastly, 
by  Gelasius,  in  respect  of  those  baptized  and 
ordained  by  Acacius.'"  It  was  also  by  no  means 
universally  held,  *'  that  the  power  of  the  keys,  or 
of  binding  and  loosing,  belonged  to  the  other 
bishops  just  as  much  as  to  the  Bishop  of  Rome" 
(p.  81).  If  this  were  the  general  view,  how  could 
Coelestius,  by  gaining  over  the  Pope,  hope  for  his 
absolution  from  the  anathema  pronounced  upon 
him  in  Africa  ?  "^  how  could  the  Abbot  Eutyches, 
deposed  by  his  patriarch  Flavian,  expect  from 
Pope  Leo  restitution  1  "^    how  could  Leo,  in   an 

1^  Phillips,  v.,  §  210,  p.  147,  seq. 

"0  Thomassin  op.  cit.,  P.  ii,  L.  iii,  c.  24.  Phillips,  §  211,  p. 
158,  seq. 

^^^  Siric,  ep.  i,  ad  Himer,  n.  19,  p.  636.  Innoc,  ep.  17,  ad  Ruf. 
n-  9>  P-  835.  Bonifac.  I.,  ep.  4,  ad  Ruf.  p.  1019.  Sixt.  III.,  ep. 
2,  n.  2,  p.  1238,  seq.;  ep.  I,  n.  5,  p.  1235.  Leo  M.,ep.  104,  105. 
Ballerini  Admonit.  in  Leon.  M.,  ep.  I,  2,  §  4,  t.  i.,  p.  578.  Gelas. 
ep.  ad  Euph.  Mansi.  viii.  5. 

^^2  Alarms  Mercator  Commonit.,  c.  2.  Zosim.,  ep.  2,  n.  2,  p. 
944.   Facund.  Plerm.  vii.  3.    Natal.  Alex.  HE.  Scec.  v.,  Dissert,  ii. 

^^3  Hefele  IL,  315,  seq.  329.  Eutych.  ep.  ad  Leon  (ep.  21).  Cf. 
Leo,  ep.  23,  ad  Flav.,  c.  i.  Eutyches  said,  "  Libellum  appellationis  se 
obtulisse  nee  tarnen  fuisse  susceptum."  Leo  desires  further  infor- 
mation, "Quoniam  nihil  possumus  incosi^nitis  rebus  in  cujusquam 
partis  praejudicium  definire."  Cf.  Bennettis,  t.  ii.,  P.  iii.,  p.  404, 
seq. 


136      The  Primacy  and  its  Development. 

epistle  to  the  patriarch  Anatolius,  reserve  to  himself 
judgment  on  the  heads  of  the  Eutychian  heresy  ?  ""^ 
and  Theodoret  request  of  the  same  Pope  his  re- 
storation, and,  in  virtue  of  the  Papal  sentence, 
obtain  his  seat  among  the  Bishops  of  Chalcedon  ?  "^ 
Moreover,  the  correspondence  carried  on  during 
the  Acacian  controversy,  clearly  shows,  in  despite 
of  Byzantine  resistance,  the  higher  power  of  the 
keys  possessed  by  the  Bishop  of  Rome.  Hereby 
we  may  explain  what  is  further  said  : — 

(7.)  "The  Bishops  of  Rome  could  exclude  neither 
individuals  nor  churches  from  the  Communion 
of  the  Church  Universal.  They  could  withdraw 
their  own  Church  from  communion  with  particular 
bishops  or  churches,  and  they  often  did  so  ;  but 
this  in  nowise  affected  their  relation  to  other 
bishops  or  churches,  as  was  shown,  among  other 
instances,  by  the  long  Antiochene  Schism  from 
361  to  413.  And,  on  the  other  hand,  if  they 
admitted  into  their  own  Communion  one  excom- 
municated by  other  churches,  this  did  not  bring  him 
into  communion  with  any  other  church"  (p.  81). 

As  regards  Meletius  of  Antioch,  who  long  passed 
for  an  Arian,  the  Orientals,  who  were  devoted  to 
him,  regarded  the  Westerns  as  ill-informed  in  the 
matter,"^  and  exerted  their  utmost  endeavours  to 
procure  for  him  the  recognition  of  Rome.  But 
Meletius,  as  well  as  his  rivals,  uniformly  asserted 
that  they  were  ever  in  the  communion  of  Pope 
Damasus  ;"'  and  afterwards  the  orthodoxy  of 
Meletius,"^  as  well  as  of  Paulinus,  was  acknow- 

^^^  Leo,  ep.  85,  c.  2. 

"5  Hefele  II.,  371,  406,  seq.  ;  423,  459,  seq.  Natal.  Alex.  Saec. 
v.,  dissert,  xiv. 

'^'^^  Basil.,  ep.  214,  ad  Terent.  Com.  c.  2.     Migne  xxxii.  785. 

^^''  Hier,  ep.  ad  Damas.,  p.  551  ;  Meletius,  Vitalis  atque  Paulinus 
tibi  hcerere  se  dicunt. 

^^^  Meletius,  in  the  year  378,  subscribed  the  tome  of  Pope  Dama- 


The  Primacy  and  its  Development.      \  3  7 

ledged.  The  patriarch  Flavian,  raised  to  the  place 
of  the  former  in  the  year  381,  and  whom,  after  the 
death  of  Paulinus,  Evagrius  opposed,  obtained  even 
the  communion  of  Rome  and  of  Alexandria  long 
before  415,  and  about  the  year  398. "^  This  schism, 
a  consequence  of  the  Arian  commotions,  is  rather 
a  proof  for  the  reverse  of  what  our  opponents 
assert ;  and  in  nowise  can  a  rightful  claim  be  de- 
duced from  it. 

(8.)  "Fora  longtime  nothing  was  known  in  Rome 
of  definite  rights  bequeathed  by  Peter  to  his  succes- 
sors. Nothing  but  a  care  for  the  weal  of  the  Church 
and  the  duty  of  watching  over  the  observance  of  the 
canons  was  ascribed  to  them"  (p.  81).  ^wX.  every 
0^7//^  establishes  definite  rights  also,  and  the  object 
of  the  primacy,  which  is  the  preservation  of 
ecclesiastical  unity,  requires  corresponding  means. 
It  was,  therefore,  not  even  necessary  that  the 
special  definite  rights  of  the  successors  of  Peter 
should  be  determined.  What  the  Papal  legate, 
Philip,  declared  at  Ephesus  in  the  year  431,'^° 
met  with  no  contradiction,  and  expressed  but  the 
firm  conviction  of  the  Roman  Church.  If  the 
Popes  appealed  to  synods,  this  they  did  without 
wishing  to  call  in  question  the  derivation  of  their 
power  from  Peter,  which,  on  the  contrary,  these 
same  Popes  prominently  brought  forward.  But 
Leo  I.,  we  are  told,  did   not  venture  to  contradict 

sus  of  369,  Coustant,  p.  500.  Hefele  I.  718,  not.  in  Nat.  Alex. 
HE.  Srec.  v.,  diss,  xxxiv. 

^^'^  Vales,  not.  in  Theod.  HE.  Scec  v.  23.  Soz.  viii.  3.  Dollin- 
ger's  Manual  of  Church  History,  i.  91. 

120  ««  jj.  jg  ^  matter  of  doubt  to  none,  nay,  it  is  known  to  all  ages, 
that  the  holy  and  blessed  Peter,  the  President  and  the  Head  of  the 
Apostles,  the  pillar  of  faith,  and  the  foundation  of  the  Catholic 
Church,  received  from  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ  the  keys  of  the  King- 
dom of  Heaven.  .  .  .  His  successor  and  vicar,  the  holy  and  most 
blessed  Pope  Celestine,  has,  in  order  to  supply  his  presence,  sent  us 
to  this  holy  Synod."    Cone.  Ephes.  act.  iii.    Mansi.,  t.  iv.,  p.  1295. 


138      The  Primacy  and  its  Develop7ne7it. 

the  Council  of  Chalcedon  in  its  twenty-eighth 
canon,  which  asserted  that  it  was  the  fathers  who 
had  adjudged  the  primacy  to  Rome,  and  that  on 
account  of  the  pohtical  pre-emiinence  of  the  city 
(p.  82).  But  if  Leo  more  immediately  opposed 
the  exaltation  of  the  see  of  Constantinople  above 
those  of  Alexandria  and  of  Antioch,  (for  the 
Roman  primacy  was  not  disputed, '^^  but  only 
inaccurately  explained)  ;  so  he  still  protests  against 
this  last  declaration  also ;  for  he  shows  that 
secular  pre-eminence  could  establish  no  ecclesiasti- 
cal one  ;  that  Constantinople  is  indeed  an  imperial 
city,  but  not  an  apostolical  see  ;'^^^  and  he  makes 
use  of  his  high  prerogative,  as  -'  by  the  authority 
of  Peter"  he  rejects  and  annuls  this  canon/^^  The 
edict  of  Valentinian  III.,  under  the  date  of  the  8th 
July  of  the  year  445,"-^  states,  as  the  legal  titles  of 
the  Roman  primacy,  in  the  first  place  the  merits  of 
St  Peter,  next  the  dignity  of  the  city,  and  the 
authority  of  the  synod,  and  characterizes  the 
conduct  of  Hilarius  of  Aries  as  an  act  of  disobedi- 
ence and  rash  usurpation.  The  sentence  of  Leo/^^ 
which,  moreover,  was  thoroughly  justifiable,  would 
be  fully  valid  without,  as  is  said,  the  imperial 
sanction  ;  but  this  had  been  rendered  necessary 
by  the  continued  armed  resistance.  This  edict, 
according  to  Janus,  if  it  had  obtained  full  force, 
would  have  transformed  the  whole  constitution  of 
the  Western  Church  as  it  then  stood  ;  and  luould 
thus   J  lave   rendered   a  ps  endo -Isidore  snperflnons. 

^^^  TTjOo  irdvTOJV  TO,  TrptJTeta  KbX  rrjv  i^aiperov  rifiriv,  "  pre-eminence 
above  all,  and  exalted  dignity,"  is  what  even  the  imperial  com- 
missioners in  this  transaction  adjudged  to  the  Pope.  Cf.  Hefele 
II,  524. 

^^2  Leo,  ep.  104,  c.  3,  p.  993. 

^2=*  Ibid,  ep.  105,  c.  3.» 

^"*  Ibid,  ep.  II,  p.  636,  seq.    ' 

^^^  Ibid,  ep.  10,  ad.  Episc.  Gall.,  p.  628,  seg. 


The  Primacy  a7id  its  Development.      1 39 

But  that  this  edict  did  not  come  into  force,  so  far 
as  regards  submission  to  the  authority  of  the 
Roman  see  ;  that  it  was  an  innovation,  and  had  not 
for  its  object,  as  it  declares,  the  protection  of  old 
ecclesiastical  usage,  is  by  no  means  proved.  That 
Leo,  in  dealing  with  the  Orientals,  appealed,  in 
the  first  place,  to  the  sixth  canon  of  the  Nicene 
Council  (p.  Z^^,  was  grounded  on  the  fact,  that  he 
conceived  himself  bound  to  protect  chiefly  the 
rights  of  the  sees  of  Alexandria  and  of  Antioch, 
while  his  own  primacy,  not  directly  assailed, 
remained  unshaken.  That  the  opposition  he  and 
his  successors  offered  to  the  innovation  made  at 
the  Council  of  Chalcedon  remained  fruitless,  is 
utterly  false.  Anatolius  himself  acknowledged 
that  the  confirmation  was  reserved  to  the  Papal 
power  ;'"^  the  Emperor  Marcian  sought  to  curb 
the  ambition  of  his  patriarch  ;'^^  the  collections  of 
canons  down  to  John  Scholasticus,  who,  like 
Theodore  the  Lector,  knows  only  twenty-seven 
canons,  did  not  receive  the  twenty-eighth  canon. "^ 
It  was  only  much  later  that  any  one  ventured  to 
appeal  again  to  this  canon. 

(9.)  "  What  was  afterwards  called  the  Papal 
system,  when  first  proclaimed  in  words  only,  was 
repudiated  wnth  horror  by  that  best  and  greatest 
of  popes,  Gregory  the  Great"  (p.  83).  But  this 
distinguished  Pontiff,  who  in  opposition  to  the 
Byzantine  patriarch  of  his  time,  did  not  wish  to  be 
called  "  QEcumenical,"  ^'^  and  who  ever  displayed 

^-^  Anatol.,  ep.  142  Leon,  c.  4  :  cum  et  sic  gestorum  vis  omnis  et 
confirmatio  auctoritati  vestroe  Beatitudiiiis  fuerit  reservata. 

^2''  Leon,  ep.  128-134,  ad.  Marc. 

^-^  Theod.,  Lect,  L.  I,  p.  168,  ed,  Migne.  Ballerin.  de  antiqu. 
canon,  collect.  P,  i.,  c,  2,  n,  2,  seq.  Diss.  i.  Quesnell.  a.  451,  n. 
14,  p.  269.     Pilra  Monum.  i.,  p.  534. 

129  Qf  Thomassin.  op.  cit.,  P,  i.,  L.  i.,  c.  II,  n.  10,  seq.  Maur  in 
edit.  0pp.  Greg,  ÄL  Vita  S,  Gr.,  L,  iii.,  c.  i. 


140     The  Primacy  and  its  Developinerit. 

the  greatest  personal  humility,  was  very  conscious 
of  his  own  rights  and  dignity.  He  knew  well, 
indeed,  that  all  bishops,  even  that  of  Constanti- 
nople, are  subject  to  the  Apostolic  see  ;'^°  he  knew 
that  to  Peter,  the  prince  of  the  Apostles,  was 
committed,  by  the  mouth  of  our  Lord,  the  care  of 
the  whole  Church  j'^'  like  many  of  his  predecessors, 
he  puts  Peter  and  the  Pope  exactly  on  the  same 
footing  ;  for  to  come  to  the  Apostolic  see,  signifies 
with  him  to  come  to  Peter. '32  He  firmly  adhered 
to  his  right  of  receiving  appeals  from  the  whole 
Church  ;'^3  rebuked  the  rigid  excesses  of  bishops, 
as  in  the  case  of  the  Iconaclast,  Serenus  of 
Marseilles  ;^^-*  like  former  Pontiffs,  appointed 
Vicars  Apostolic  \^^^  examined  into  the  conduct 
of  bishops  ;^^^  and  so  forth.  The  substantial 
power  of  the  Primacy  is  found  in  the  acts  of 
Gregory  also  ;  and  many  rights  were  exercised  by 
him  which  Janus  denies  to  the  earlier  popes. 

10.  ''There  are  many  National  Churches  which 
were  never  under  Rome,  and  never  even  had  any 
intercourse  by  letter  with  Rome,  without  this  being 
considered  a  defect,  or  causing  any  difficulty  about 
Church  communion  "  (p.  84).    With  such  Churches 

^^°  L.  ix.,  ep.  12,  p.  941,  ed.  Paris  1705. 

^^^  L.  v.,  ep,  20,  p.  748. 

^^2  L.  ii.  ep.  53,  p.  619,  Beitnettis,  P.  i.,  t.  i.,  p.  III.  Cf.  Pichler  i., 
p.  128,  who  (in  note  2)  at  the  same  time  observes,  that  ahhough 
Pope  Gregory  I.  has  so  zealously  sought  to  protect  the  rights  of  his 
fellow-bishops,  tliat  he  many  times  seems  to  sacrifice  his  own,  yet 
the  writing  of  the  abbe  Guettee  (La  Papaute  moderne  condamnee 
par  le  Pape  S.  Gregoire  le  grand,  Paris,  1 861)  goes  much  too  fai". 

^^^  L.  iii.,  ep.  53  ;  L,  iv.,  ep.  132  ;  L.  v.,  ep.  18  ;  L.  vi.,  ep. 
14,  17,  66,  ;  L.  vii.,  ep.  5-34;  L.  vi.,  ep.  24,  ad  ep.  Ravenn.  ; 
Causa,  quae  a  Johanne  presbytero  contra  Johannem  Constantin.  .  .  . 
orta  est,  secundum  canones  ad  Sedem  Apostolicam  recurrit,  et 
nostra  est  sententia  definita. 

^•^^  L,  ix.,  ep.  105  ;  L.  xi.,  ep.  13. 

^^^  L.  ii.,  ep.  22,  23  ;  L.  v.,  ep.  53-55,  &c. 

^^  L.  i.,  ep,  77  ;  L.  ii.,  24 ;  L.  iii.,  ep.  40 ;  L.  iv.,  ep.  10,  &c. 


The  Primacy  and  its  Development.      141 

is  classed,  in  the  first  place,  the  Armenian  Church. 
We  will  not  here  adduce  what  Armenian  writers 
have  observed  respecting  the  earlier  connexion  of 
that  Church  with  Rome.^^'  We  only  assert,  that 
before  Armenia,  for  the  most  part,  fell  into  the 
Monophysite  errors,  and  thus  its  Church  became 
heretical  (and  so  cannot  here  come  under  con- 
sideration), it  was  under  the  jurisdiction  of  the  See 
of  Caesarea,'^^  and  thereby  mediately  united  with 
Rome.  A  more  active  intercourse  was  prevented 
by  intestine  wars,  and  by  the  Persian  conquest. 
In  the  second  instance  alleged,  that  of  the  Persian 
Church,  so  grievously  persecuted,  and  at  last  utterly 
extirpated,  this  was  still  more  the  case.  The  sus- 
picions of  the  rulers,  the  religious  fanaticism  of  the 
fire-worshippers,  and  the  magnitude  of  the  persecu- 
tion, must  here  be  taken  into  account.  Who  could 
regard  the  present  severance  of  the  Polish  Catholics 
from  Rome,  as  a  fact  proving  the  proposition,  that 
an  union  with  the  Papal  See  is  not  necessary  to 
Catholicity  ?  Thirdly,  with  respect  to  the  Ethiopian 
Church,  it  stood  through  the  See  of  Alexandria 
(until  it  embraced  the  Monophysite  heresy),  in  a 
mediate  connexion  with  Rome.  Fourthly,  that  the 
old  Irish  Church  was  for  centuries  separated  from 
Rome,  has  been  disproved  by  Dr  Greith,  bishop  of 
St  Gall. '^9  And  lastly,  with  respect  to  the  ancient 
British  Church,  which  had  very  much  degenerated 
in  the  times  of  Pope  Gregory  the  Great,  the  answer 
is  likewise  given  in  historical  data.'-'° 

^37  Samueljan's  "  Conversion  of  Armenia,"  Vienna,  1S44.  Theo- 
logical Quarterly  Rrciew,  t.  v.,  p.  546.      Tübingen,  1846, 

^"^^  Le  Quien  Oriens  Christianus,  i.,  1355,  Neander's  Ch.  Hist., 
i.,  469. 

1=^9  History  of  the  Old  Irish  Church.  By  Charies  John  Greith, 
Bishop  of  St  Gall,  vol.  i.,  especially  p.  453,  seq.,  Freiburg,  1867  (in 
German). 

^^  Dollinger's  "  Manual  of  Church  History,"  i.,  p,  62,  seq. 


142      The  Primacy  and  its  Development. 

Janus  continues  :  ''  If  we  put  into  a  positive  form 
this  negative  account  of  the  position  of  the  ancient 
Popes,  we  get  the  following  picture  of  the  organ- 
ization of  tiie  ancient  Church  : — Without  prejudice 
to  its  agreement  with  the  Church  Universal  in  all 
its  essential  points  "  [but  in  these  matters  the  five 
National  Churches  did  not  seem  to  care  much  about 
the  Church  Universal],  ''every  CJmrch  manages  its 
ozuri  ajfairs  with  perfect  freedom  and  independence'' 
[just  as  in  the  fifteenth  section  of  the  Prussian  Con- 
stitution of  the  31st  January  1850,  which  thereby 
receives  an  antique  stamp,  as  the  old  Constitution 
of  the  Church  looks  so  very  modern],  *'  and  main- 
tains its  own  traditional  usages  "  [with  regard  to 
rites  there  was  later  also  perfect  freedom  allowed] 
"  and  discipline  ;  all  questions  not  concerning  the 
whole  ChnrcJi,  ox  oi primary  importance''  [these  two 
exceptions,  as  our  previous  investigation  shows,  are 
well  and  prudently  put],  "being  settled  on  the  spot. 
The  Church  is  organized  in  dioceses,  provinces,  and 
patriarchates ;  National  Churches  were  added  after- 
wards in  the  West "  (p.  85). 

Certainly  the  organization  in  patriarchates  is  not 
primitive,  nor  does  it  belong  to  the  first  ages  of 
Christianity  ;  and  if  the  later  development  of  the 
Papacy  could  establish  no  right,  can  such  a  claim  on 
behalf  of  the  patriarchates  be  yet  set  up  ?  Would 
it  not  be  here  necessary  to  assign  a  terminus  fixiis, 
which  for  both  should  be  uniformly  maintained  as 
a  terminus  normalis?  Do  we  not  expose  ourselves 
to  the  suspicion  of  arbitrary  caprice,  when,  accord- 
ing to  pleasure,  we  recognize  even  in  the  fifth,  sixth, 
seventh,  eighth,  and  ninth  centuries  the  validity  of 
historical  claims  ? 

But  this  is  said  only  in  passing.  Our  historian 
of  those  happy  old  times  teaches  us  further  :  "  The 
bishop  of  Rome  stands  at  the  head  as  first patri- 


The  Primacy  and  its  Development.      143 

arcJi  "  [he  stood  at  the  head  before  the  name  of 
patriarch  had  even  been  heard  of],  "  as  the  centre 
and  representative  of  unity"  [how  fared  it  then 
with  the  five  National  Churches,  who  knew  nothini^' 
about  him  ?],  "as  the  bond  uniting  east  and  west,  the 
Churches  of  the  Greek  and  Latin  tongue,  the  chief 
watcher  and  guardian  of  the,  as  yet  very  few,  com- 
mon laws  of  the  Church — for  a  long  time  only  the 
Nicene  ; — but  he  docs  not  encroach  on  the  rights  of 
patriarchs,  metropolitans,  and  bishops.  Laws  and 
articles  of  faith,  of  universal  obligation,  are  issued 
only  by  the  whole  Church,  concentrated  and  repre- 
sented at  an  CEcumenical  Council  "  (p.  85-6).  How 
the  Church  could  have  been  served  by  a  head  and 
a  centre  of  unity  "  not  encroacJiingl'  that  were  yet  a 
matter  of  inquiry ;  but  we  have,  on  the  contrary, 
found  a  head  manywise  encroaching,  while  the 
paragraphs  of  the  Ecclesiastical  Constitution  re- 
specting CEcumenical  Councils,  as  alleged  by 
Janus,  are  to  be  found  in  no  ancient  canon,  but  are 
simply  to  be  deduced  from  practice.  But  why 
should  not  practice  be  decisive  in  the  case  of  the 
Popes  also  t 


CHAPTER    VIII. 


ROMAN  FORGERIES. 


^ITHERTO  we  have  adduced  In  favour  of 
the  Papal  Primacy,  only  documents 
acknowledged  to  be  genuine  ;  and  the 
inference  to  be  drawn  from  these  must 
be  apparent  to  every  reader.  But  as  the  full 
account  of  the  forgeries  made  in  favour  of  the 
bishops  of  Rome  has  been  characterized  as  one  of 
the  chief  services  of  Janus/  it  is  worth  while  to 
cast  an  inquiring  glance  into  this  matter. 

We  do  not  regret  that  the  naive  poesy  of  the 
old  Christian  times  has  long  disappeared,  and  that 
the  severest  historical  criticism  has  been  arrayed 
against  it.  But  since  the  extinction  of  the  school  of 
the  Romanticists,  one-sided,  doubtless,  but  still  full 
of  feeling  and  of  intellect,  the  understanding  for 
that  poetry  has  by  degrees  disappeared,  and  men 
are  no  more  satisfied  with  eliminating  the  spurious 
and  the  interpolated,  nor  with  investigating  times, 
places,  authors,  and  circumstances  ;  but  even  entire 
ages  are  recklessly  stigmatized  as  epochs  of  bar- 
barism and  darkness,  of  conscious  fraud,  and  in- 
tentional falsification ;  while  they  are  measured 
exclusively  by  the  standard  of  the  present,  and 
no  grounds  of  palliation  are  in  anywise  admitted. 
^  Allgeme'me  Zeitung,  3d  October,  App.,  n.  276. 


Roman  Forgeries.  145 

Even  pseudo-Isidore  once  found  an  apology,  in  so 
far  as  his  compilation  was  calculated  to  furnish  the 
proof,  "  that  there  are  times  in  the  history  of  the 
Church,  wherein  supposititious  books  contained  far 
more  Christian  sense  and  spirit,  than  in  our  days 
the  greater  part  of  genuine  works.'"" 

Independently  of  the  apocryphal  gospels  and  his- 
tories of  the  apostles,  the  Sibylline,  Orphic,  and  other 
verses,  the  pseudo-apostolic  and  pseudo-Clementine 
literature ;  Christian  antiquity  had  many  sagas 
and  legends,  which  certainly  did  not  all  spring 
from  heretics,  attaching,  as  they  did,  to  the  apostles, 
to  celebrated  martyrs,  and  their  adversaries.  Al- 
ready, in  the  period  of  the  Christian  persecutions, 
the  narrative  of  the  contest  of  the  apostle  Peter 
v^rith  Simon  the  magician  in  Rome,  had  been  worked 
up,  and  was  widely  diffused.  Must  all  these 
legends  have  been  wicked  inventions  and  conscious 
forgeries  1  This  our  historians  appear  to  assume, 
when  (p.  123)  they  speak  of  the  compilation  of 
spurious  acts  of  Roman  martyrs,  begun  towards 
the  end  of  the  fifth  century,  and  continued  for 
some  centuries,  and  ''  which  modern  criticism,  even 
at  Rome,  has  been  obliged  to  give  up ;"  after  they 
had  previously  spoken  of  the  process  of  forgeries 
and  fictions,  ''  carried  on  in  the  interests  of  Römer 
Was  then  Rome,  pre-eminently  the  city  of  mar- 
tyrs, to  be  still  more  glorified  by  these  inventions? 
This  she  certainly  needed  not.  Historic  docu- 
ments, and  the  Catacombs,  sufficed  to  insure  to  her 
this  glory.  Edifying  and  entertaining  legends 
sprang  up  everywhere,  and  in  the  countries  of  the 
East  also. 

We  can  examine  those  forgeries  only  which  can 
be  stated   as,   in    some  degree,    invented   for  the 

2  Möhler  on  the  Pseudo-Isidore.  Miscellaneous  AYiitings, 
edited  by  Döllinger,  vol.  i.  p.  284. 

K 


146  Roman  Forgeries, 

exaltation  of  the  Papal  power.  Strictly  considered, 
the  saga  of  the  conversion  and  the  baptism  of  the 
Emperor  Constantine  by  Pope  Sylvester,  with  the 
legends  connected  therewith,^  and  which  was  after- 
wards adopted  by  the  Greeks  also,  does  not  belong 
to  this  class  of  fictions.  It  responded  to  the  reli- 
gious feelings  better  than  the  record  furnished  by 
Eusebius  ;  it  could  serve  for  the  glorification  of  the 
emperor,  as  well  as  of  the  Roman  Church,  but  not 
for  the  extension  of  the  Pontifical  power.  The 
Gesta  Liberii  followed,  with  the  object  of  confirm- 
ing the  fable  of  the  Roman  baptism  of  Constan- 
tine, and  of  representing  Liberius  as  a  Pontiff 
purified  by  penance,  and  favoured  by  a  divine 
miracle  (p.  124).^  But  we  must  look  for  forgeries 
of  a  weightier  purport. 

For  a  right  treatment  of  the  subject,  It  were  im- 
periously necessary  to  have  followed  a  strict 
chronological  order,  especially  as  Janus  (p.  117) 
asserts :  "  Like  the  successive  strata  of  the  earth 
covering  one  another,  so  layer  after  layer  of  for- 
geries and  fabrications  was  piled  up  In  the  Church." 
Instead  of  this  method,  Janus  proceeds^  without 
any  regard  to  the  order  of  time,  springing  arbi- 
trarily from  one  statement  to  another.  At  p.  94, 
he  speaks  of  pseudo-Isidore  ;  then  old  and  new 
are  brought  together  in  a  motley  group  ;  no  reader 
not  perfectly  familiar  with  the  subject  can  find  his 
way  ;  everything  is  piled  together ;  misrepresen- 
tations of  genuine  texts,  substitution  of  spurious 
ones,  various  readings,  and  erroneous  interpreta- 
tions. Even  the  form  of  exposition  shows  that 
the  whole  object  of  the  work  is  a  purely  polemical 
one,  and  that  the  position  of  the  author,  or  rather 

3  Cf.  Döllinger,  Papstfabeln,  p.  52,  seq. 
•*  Ibid.,  p.  112,  seq. 


Roman  Forgeries.  147 

authors,  is  that  of  party  men.  Everything,  whether 
suitably  or  unsuitably,  is  brought  against  the  hated 
theory  of  Infallibility,  as  in  pages  96-100,  seq. 

Yet  the  separate  stones  are  to  be  shown  us,  out 
of  which  the  whole  papal  system  of  universal 
monarchy  was  erected.  "  For  a  long  time  all  that 
was  done  was  to  interpret  the  canon  of  Sardica,^  so 
as  to  extend  the  appellant  jurisdiction  of  the  Pope 
to  whatever  could  be  brought  under  the  general  and 
elastic  term  of 'greater  causes.'  But  from  the  end 
of  the  fifth  century  the  Papal  pretensions  had  ad- 
vanced to  a  point  beyond  this,  in  consequence  of 
the  attitude  assumed  by  Leo  and  Gelasius  ;  and 
from  that  time  began  a  course  of  systematic  fabri- 
cations, sometimes  manufactured  in  Rome,  some- 
times originating  elsewhere  ;  but  adopted  and 
utilized  there"  (p.  122). 

Above  all,  our  historian  alleges  that  the  Roman 
legates  at  Chalcedon,  in  the  year  451,  appealed  to 
the  sixth  Nicene  canon,  with  an  additional  clause 
about  the  Roman  Church ;  but  that  the  deceit,  to  their 
confusion,  was  discovered  by  the  reading  of  the 
genuine  text  (p.  123).  But  such  a  "confusion"  of  the 
legates  is,  as  Hefele  has  shown, ^  not  to  be  proved 
from  the  acts  ;  it  is  certain  that  the  Emperor  Valen- 
tinian  III.,  in  the  year  445,  knew  of  that  clause, 
and  several  ancient  Latin  codices  have  the  read- 
ing ;^  then  it  can  be  shown  that  the  main  views  in 
that  Canon,  in  regard  to  the  power  of  the  Eastern 
patriarchs,  have  for  their  basis  the  recognition  of 
the  Roman  primacy.^     But  that  a  forgery  of  the 


5  The  matter  hereto  belonging  was  commented  on  in  the  preced- 
ing chapter,  where  also  is  to  be  found  an  appreciation  of  the  other 
assertions. 

^  Concil.  i.,  p.  384,  seri.  ii.,  p.  522  seq. 

''  Valent.  ed.  s.  ep.  II.     Leon.  M.  Prisca  ap.     Manji.  vi.  1127. 

*  Hagemann,  loc.  cit,  p.  596-59S. 


148  Roman  Forgeries, 

sixth  Nicene  Canon  did  not  proceed  from  the 
Popes,  and  that  they  knew  of  no  Nicene  Canon 
touching  the  primacy,  the  assurances  given  by 
them  befolge  and  aftei'  the  year  45 1  show  that  the 
first  General  Council  contained  nothing  upon  the 
Papal  supremacy,  founded  as  it  had  been  by  the 
word  of  Christ  himself.^  The  spurious  Arabic 
Canons  of  this  Council  only  prove  that,  even  among 
the  Orientals,  the  recognition  of  the  Roman  primacy 
was  not  utterly  extinct.  They  were  certainly  not 
fabricated  by  Rome.'° 

Towards  the  end  of  the  sixth  century  there  was 
a  fabrication  of  Cyprian's  book  on  the  Unity  of  the 
Church — a  fabrication  made  in  Rome,  and,  indeed, 
in  a  letter  of  Pope  Pelagius  IL  to  the  Istrian 
bishops,  because  his  words  on  the  equality  of  the 
apostles  were  in  too  glaring  a  contradiction  to  the 
theory  set  up  since  the  time  of  Gelasius  (p.  127). 
But  why  were  the  latter  words  not  rather  expunged 
here  as  well  as  in  other  writings  ?  Why  were 
merely  some  words  here  inserted,  which,  moreover, 
contain  nothing  but  what  has  been  elsewhere,  and 
even  more  distinctly,  expressed  by  Cyprian  ?  " 
The  genuine  text  says  enough  with  these  words  : 
tamen  ut  unitatem  manifestaret,  unitatem  ab  uno 
incipientem  sua  auctoritate  disposuit.  .  .  .  Exor- 
dium ab  unitate  proficiscitur."    The  inserted  words 

^  Bonif.  I.,  ep.  14,  n.  i,  p.  1037.  Nicoenae  Synodi  non  aliud  prse- 
cepta  testantur,  adeo  ut  non  aliquid  super  eum  ausa  sit  constituere, 
cum  videret,  nihil  supra  meritum  suum  ei  posse  conferri ;  omnia 
denique  huic  noverat  Domini  sermone  concessa.  Gelas.  ep.  33. 
(See  above,  chap,  iv.,  note  47.) 

1"  Hereto  belong  Can.  39  Turr.  ;  Can.  44  Labbe.  t.  ii.  Cf. 
Eennettis,  P.  I.,  t.  i,,  p.  145, 146.  Respecting  the  discovery  of  these 
canons,  see  Hefele  Cone,  vol.  i.,  p.  345,  seq. 

^1  Möhler's  *'  Patrology,"  p.  862,  note.  Lumper  Hist.,  crit.  xi., 
p.  413-418. 

^^  Corp.  Script.  Eccles.  Lat,  editum  consilio  et  impensis  acad.  lit. 
Goes.  Vindob.,  vol.  iii.,  P.  i.    Cypriani  0pp.  rec.  Gulielmns  Hartcl. 


Roniajt  Forgeries.  149 

are,  indeed,  nothing  more  than  the  marginal  note 
of  a  copyist  or  reader,  which  afterwards  crept  into 
the  text,'^  whereof  we  have  many  hundred  ex- 
amples. Such  a  Codex  Pelagius  II.  might  have 
had  before  him  ;  and  nothing  justifies  us  in  here 
assuming  an  intentional  forgery.  That  Cyprian, 
in  despite  of  his  controversy  with  Pope  Stephen  I., 
can  not  be  regarded  as  an  opponent  of  the  Roman 
primacy,  has  long  been  proved. ''^  It  is  also  not 
true,  that  the  equality  of  all  the  apostles  can  in  no 
way  be  reconciled  with  "the  theory  set  up  since 
the  time  of  Gelasius."  ^^  Lastly,  it  is  a  most 
arbitrary  assumption  to  speak  like  Janus  (p.  127-8), 
on  the  relation  of  the  fourth  and  of  the  fifth  divi- 
sion of  the  catalogue  of  Gelasius,  in  reference  to 
the  judgment  on  Cyprian's  writings.'^ 

"But  already,  at  the  beginning  of  the  sixth  cen- 
tury, some  very  effectual  and  gradually  acknow- 
ledged fictions  were  put  forward  in  Rome,  which 
were  to  establish  the  maxim,  that  the  Pope,  as  the 
highest  authority  in  the  Church,  can  be  judged  by 
no  one"  (p.  103  G.)  For  this  purpose,  and  in 
order  to  keep  off  secular  judges,  the  pretended 
Synod  of  Sinuessa,  the  Constitutum  Sylvestri,  the 

Vindob.  1868,  p.  212,  de  Cath.  Eccl.  imitate,  c.  4.  The  Munich 
Codex  (p.  208,  sec.  ix.,  x.)  has  the  interpolated  words.  Cf.  also 
Constant,  Praef.  in  ep.  Rom.  Pont.,  P.  i.,  note,  7,  8,  p.  4-6. 
^^  Cf.  Alzog  Patrology,  second  ed.,  p.  170  (in  German.) 
^*  Prudent.  Maran.  Priefat.  in  0pp.  Cypr.,  §  3,  Card.  Gerdil 
Confutazione  di  due  libelli  contro  il  Breve  :  Super  Soliditate,  P. 
i.  (0pp.  ed.  Rom.  xii.  pp.  69-77.)  Schwane's  "  History  of  Dogmas 
in  the  Ante-Nicene  Period,"  Münster,  1862,  p.  724,  scq. 

^^  The  unlimited  and  universal  jurisdiction  of  the  apostles  appears 
as  an  extraordinary  legatine  power  not  to  be  transmitted  ;  while  in 
Peter  it  formed  an  ordinary  and  transmissible  power.  So  thinks  the 
Gallican  Natalis  Alexander  (Hist.  Eccl.  Seec,  §  i  ;  Dissert  iv.,  §  4),  to- 
gether with  many  theologians.  Very  copiously  has  Passaglia  treated 
this  matter  (De  Eccl.  Christi.,  vol.  ii.  Ratisb.,  1856.  Lib.  iii.,  c.  9, 
seq.)  Cf.  Constant,  loc.  cit. 
^"  Cf.  Hefele  Cone,  ii.,  §  217,  p.  597,  sei.;  ^oi>  ^^^- 


i=^o 


Romaii  Foi^geries, 


Gesta  Xysti  III.,  and  of  Polychronius,  were  fabri- 
cated during  the  pontificate  of  Pope  Symmachus, 
who  flourished  from  498  to  514;  and  these  fabri- 
cations had  reference  to  the  attitude  of  Rome 
towards  the  Church  of  Constantinople  (p.  124). 
These  documents  are  indeed  spurious  ; ''  but  do 
they  justify  the  conclusion  that  the  maxim  **  prima 
Sedes  a  nemine  judicatur  "  was  first  introduced  by 
them  ?  If  the  maxim  were  so  new,  it  would  be  a 
matter  of  astonishment  that  so  many  Italian 
bishops,  and  among  them  those  of  Milan  and 
Ravenna,  should,  in  the  year  501,  have  afiirmed 
it  in  a  Roman  synod  ;  and  likewise,  that  the 
Church  of  France,  under  Avitus  of  Vienne,  should 
have  sanctioned  it/^  Janus  even  says,  "that  Pope 
Gelasius,  about  495,  for  the  first  time  insulted  the 
Greeks,  and  their  28th  Canon  of  Chalcedon,  by 
affirming  that  every  Council  must  be  confirmed, 
and  every  Church  judged  by  Rome  ;  but  she  can 
be  judged  by  none.  It  was  not  by  canons,  as  the 
Council  of  Chalcedon  afiirmed,  but  by  the  word  of 
Christ,  that  she  received  the  primacy"  (p.  125).'^ 
The  holy  Pope  Gelasius  yet  belongs  to  the  wit- 
nesses of  the  first  six  centuries,  who  alone  possess 
any  credit  with  our  author  ;  but  he  is  rejected, 
for  in  this  he  went  beyond  all  the  claims  of  his 
predecessors.  We  might,  indeed,  modestly  reply, 
that  like  claims  were  put  forth  by  earlier  Pontiffs  ; 
that  Zosimus,  in  particular,  who  reigned  from  417 

1^  Vide  Döllinger  Papstfabeln,  p.  48,  seq. 

^^  Hefele,  Cone.  ii.  624.  Thomassin  Diss,  in  Cone.  Diss.  xv.  n. 
5,  6. 

^^  We  trust  that  the  last  proposition,  also,  will  not  be  designated 
as  an  assertion  put  forth/or  the  first  time;  for  this  would  be  utterly 
unhistorieal,  and  in  eontradiction  with  the  more  ancient  testimonies 
already  addueed  by  us.  The  framing  of  the  28th  Caqon  of  Chalee- 
don  was  merely  selected,  in  order  to  justify  for  the  new  imperial  city 
the  next  rank  after  Rome. 


Ro7na}i  Foro-cries.  i ;  i 


<b 


to  41 8,  had  claimed  for  the  Papal  see  the  privilege, 
that  its  judgment  should  be  the  ultimate  and 
decisive  one.  But  this  Janus  has  already  obviated, 
as  he  remarks  (p.  82)  ;  "  By  Zosimus  it  was  still 
said,  tJic  FatJurs  it  was  who  imparted  this  privilege 
to  the  Roman  see."  To  this  we  may  venture  to 
reply  ;  first,  that  the  difference  is  not  as  to  tJie 
right  itself^  but  as  to  tJie  source  of  right ;  whether, 
according  to  Gelasius,  it  is  derived  from  Christ,  or, 
according  to  Zosimus,  from  the  Fathers.  Now, 
not  the  popes  only,  but  other  prelates,  metro- 
politans, and  patriarchs,  also,  deduced  their  pre- 
rogatives from  various  titles,  and  often  name  one, 
without  thereby  excluding  the  other ;  for  the 
proximate  title  excludes  not  the  remoter  one. 
Accordingly,  the  right  established  by  the  Fathers 
has  its  own  force  ;  the  see  of  Constantinople  could 
not  at  all  claim  any  other ;  why,  then,  should  this 
right  be  valid  for  the  latter,  and  not  for  Rome  } 
(Cpl.  c.  3  ;  Chalc.  c.  28.)  Secondly,  Zosimus  has, 
for  one  of  the  privileges  involved  in  the  primacy, 
alleged  the  tradition  of  the  Fathers,  and  most 
appropriately,  indeed ;  for,  in  respect  to  that 
privilege,  this  tradition  was  pre-eminently  decisive  ; 
but  he  has  immediately  pointed  out  the  founda- 
tion of  that  primacy,  lying  as  it  does  in 
the  promise  of  Christ,  and  proclaimed  that  the 
Roman  Church  is  founded  on  divine  as  zvell  as  on 
human  rigJit ;  and  at  the  close  of  the  introduction 
he  repeats,  that  none  can  reverse  the  Papal 
sentence.^"      Our  appeal  to  Zosimus,  with  refer- 

^^  Zosim.,  ep.  12,  ad  Aurel.,  p.  974,  ed.  Coust.  :  Quamvis/^7/n/?;z 
traditio  apostolicse  Sedi  auctoritatem  tantam  tribuerit,  ut  de  ejus 
judicio  disceptare  tmllus  änderet^  idque  per  canones  semper  rcgulasque 
(eadem  Sedes)  servaverit,  et  currens  adhuc  suis  legibus  ecclesiastica 
d.i'S,c\\A\mi,Fetri?iomi7iia(iuo  ipsa  quoque  descendit^  reverentiam  quam 
debet  exsolvat ;  tantam  enim  huic  Apostolo  canonica  antiquitas/^ 
sententias  o?rmiu?n  voluit  esse  potentiam  ex  ipsa  quoque  Christi  Dei 


152 


Roman  Forciertes 


s 


ence  to  the  first  three  words  of  his  letter,  is  fully 
sustained  by  the  whole  context.  Like  Zosimus, 
Boniface  I.,  who  flourished  from  418  to  422,  puts 
in  the  claim  also,  that  from  his  tribunal  there  is  no 
appeal,  and  that  it  has  never  been  lawful  to  reform 
a  Papal  judgment^'  Here  the  proposition  is 
enunciated  without  the  appeal  to  the  "  Fathers/' 
So  we  again  find  the  proof,  that  what  some  wished 
to  make  pass  for  a  novelty,  shows  itself  to  be  much 
older  ;  and  that  it  was  not  by  a  forgery  the  privi- 
lege in  question  of  the  Roman  see  was  first 
established.^^  Under  Symmachus,  the  chief  object 
was  to  prevent  the  intervention  of  the  Arian  King 
Theodoric  in  the  affairs  of  the  Church  of  Rome.^^ 


ttosfri  promhsione,  ut  et  ligata  solveret  et  soluta  vinciret ;  par  potes- 
tatis  conditio  data  in  eos,  qui  sedis  haereditatem  ipso  annuente 
meruissent.  .  .  .  Cum  ergo  tantre  auctoritatis  Petrus  caput  sit 
et  sequentia  omnium  majorum  studia  firmaverit,  uttain  Munanis  quam 
divinis  legibus  et  diciplinis  omnibus  firmetur,  Romana  Ecclesia, 
cujus  locum  nos  regere  et  ipsius  quoque  potestatem  nominis  obtinere 
non  latet  vos,  sed  nostis,  fratres  carissimi  et,  quemadmodum 
sacerdotes,  scire  debetis,  tamen  cum  tantum  nobis  esset  auctoritatis, 
ut  nullus  de  nostra  possit  retractare  sententia,  &=c. 

21  Bonif.  I.,  ep.  13,  ad  Ruf.  n.  2  ;  ep.  15,  ad  eumd.  n.  5,  p.  1035, 
1042.  In  the  first  passage  the  Pope  says  he  has  written  to  the 
bishops  who  had  unlawfully  assembled  that  they  ought  not  by  any 
means  to  have  met  without  thy  privity,  namely,  of  the  Vicar 
Apostolic ;  in  the  next  place,  that  our  sentence  was  not  to  be  redis- 
cussed  ;  Primo  se  citra  tuam  conscientiam  convenire  minima 
debuisse,  deinde  de  nostro  non  esse  judicio  retractandum.  In  the 
latter  passage,  the  Pope  says  no  one  has  ever  daringly  raised  up  his 
hands  against  the  Apostolic  power,  whose  judgment  it  is  not  lawful 
to  question  ;  nemo  unquam  Apostolico  culmini,  de  cujus  judicio  non 
licet  retractari,  manus  obvias  audacter  intulit. 

-■^  If  the  history  of  Polychronius  was  invented  in  order  to  bring 
forward  the  Pope,  even  in  the  year  435,  as  judge  of  an  Oriental 
patriarch  (Janus,  p.  125)  ;  so  this  invention  was  certainly  foolish  and, 
unnecessary  ;  for  already,  in  430,  Pope  Celestine  had  judged  an 
Oriental  patriarch,  namely,  Nestorius,  not  to  make  mention  of  other 
cases. 

23  Even  many  not  unimportant  historical  notices  have  been  pre- 
served to  us  in  the  Apocrypha  of  Sylvester.  See  DöUinger's  "  Hip- 
polytus  and  Callistus,"  p.  246,  seq. 


Ro77ian  Forgeries,  1 5  3 

"While  this  tendency  to  forging  documents  was 
too  strong  in  Rome,  it  appears  very  remarkable  to 
Janus  (p.  126),  that  for  a  thousand  years  no 
attempt  was  made  there  to  form  a  collection  of 
canons  of  her  own,  such  as  the  Easterns  had  as 
early  as  the  fifth  century."  To  such  a  collection, 
the  tendency  to  fictions  ought  to  have  chiefly 
impelled.  For  this  Janus  soon  finds  the  reason  ; 
the  share  of  Rome  in  ecclesiastical  legislation  was 
for  a  long  time  extremely  limited.  Still  he  re- 
members at  the  right  time  the  abbot,  Dionysius 
Exiguus,  whose  importance  indeed  he  but  very 
superficially  appreciates.  This  abbot  compiled 
several  collections  of  canon  law  ;  he  collected  even 
Papal  decretals,  but  this  others  also  had  done 
before  him.^"^  The  collection  made  by  the  order  of 
HormisdaS)^^  had  for  its  object  by  a  strictly  literal 
translation,  and  by  the  juxtaposition  of  both  texts, 
the  Greek  and  the  Latin,  to  meet  the  objections  of 
those  who,  under  the  pretext  that  they  better 
understood  Greek,  blamed  the  former  translation, 
as  well  as  to  oppose  the  objections  of  those  who 
wished  to  uphold  other  standards  of  law,  in  order 
to  violate  the  Nicene  Canons ;  and  lastly,  to 
furnish  the  Pope  with  an  insight  into  the  canons 
common  to  the  Greeks  and  Latins.  The  canons 
of  Sardica  which  were  not  before  him  in  the  Greek 
text,  the  African,  and  the  so-called  Apostolical 
Canons,  which  were  inserted  in  his  former  collec- 
tion, he  now  left  out,  because  they  were  not  uni- 
formly recognized  by  all.  This  latter  collection, 
compiled  for  a  definite  purpose,  and  which  is  now 


2*  Ballerini  de  antiqu.  collect,  canon.  P.  in.,  c.  i.,  §  2.,  n.  6. 
(Gall.  Syll.  i.,  p.  477-) 

25  The  text  of  the  preface  cited  by  Janus  (note  94)  is  in  Phillips's 
Can.  Law,  vol.  iv,,  p.  39,  n.  17,  and  in  Pitra  Monum.,  vol.  i.,  p.  41, 
seq^.     It  is  in  many  passages  obscure. 


154  Roman  Forgeries, 

lost,  could  not  obtain  the  authority  of  the  former 
one,  which  was  used  in  the  Roman  Church,  and 
afterwards  enlarged,  was  widely  diffused,  even  out 
of  Italy.^^  But  that  long  before  Dionysius,  Papal 
decrees  were  in  use  in  the  West,  as  standards  of 
ecclesiastical  law,  by  the  side  of  canons  of  Councils, 
is  established  beyond  all  doubt.^'  To  this  class 
certainly  belonged  the  later  Roman  codices  down 
to  the  time  of  Pope  Adrian  I.^^  This  collection  is 
precisely  calculated  to  show  how  far  removed  were 
the  popes  from  all  intentional  forgeries.  This  is 
attested,  too,  by  the  Liber  Diurnus,  that  book  of 
Roman  formulas,  which  had  had  no  hesitation  in 
admitting  the  condemnation  of  Honorius.^9 

But  the  Liber  Pontificalis  is  opposed  to  us.^° 
The  compilation  of  this  Papal  book,  made  about  the 
year  530,  and  which  contains  the  biographies  of 
the  popes,  appears  to  Janus  as  a  fiction  designed 
for  a  fourfold  purpose — first,  to  attest  the  mass  of 
spurious  acts  of  Roman  martyrs  ;  secondly,  to  con- 
firm the  existing  legends  about  the  Emperor  Con- 
stantine,  and  the  Popes  Sylvester,  Felix,  Liberius, 
Sixtus  IIL,  and  others  ;  thirdly,  to  assign  a  greater 
antiquity  to  some  later  liturgical  rites  ;  and, 
fourthly,  to  exhibit  the  popes  as  legislators  for  the 
whole  Church  (p.  129). 

But  here,  indeed, 

"  The  mountain  labours,  and  a  mouse  is  born." 


^^  Phillips,  loc.  cif.,  p.  40,  seqi. 

^"^  Siric.  ep.  I,  ad  Himer.,n.  20,  p.  637  :  Fraternitatis  tuas  animum 
ad  servandos  canones  et  tenenda  decretalia  constituta  magis  ac 
magis  incitamus.  .  .  .  Quamquam  statuta  Sedis  apostolicae  vel 
canonum  venerabilia  definita  nuUi  sacerdotum  Domini  ignorare  sit 
liberum,  etc.     Cf.  note  98,  seq.,  in  our  preceding  chapter. 

2^  Ballerini. /^<r.  cit.,  c.  2  (p.  484-488,  ed  Gall.)  '^  Walter's  Can. 
Law,  §  85.     Phillips,  loc.  cit.,  p.  43. 

^'^  Ed  Garnerii,  Paris,  1680,  p.  41. 

3°  Cf.  herewith  DöUinger  Papstiabeln,  especially  p.  119. 


Roman  Forgeries,  155 

The  first  and  the  third  of  these  four  "  intentions  " 
must,  indeed,  even  from  Janus's  point  of  view, 
appear  as  "harmless,"  and  of  no  importance  for 
the  question  under  discussion.  As  regards  the 
second,  the  confirmation  of  more  ancient  legends 
may,  as  the  continuation  of  a  previous  labour,  and 
the  union  of  various  stories,  be  recognized  as  a 
matter  of  little  signification. 

It  is  only  the  fourth  "purpose"  which  is  really 
of  importance.  But  as  nowhere  is  a  definite  law 
alleged  which  Damasus,  Gelasius,  and  other  popes 
had  issued,  so  the  forger  ill  understood  his  craft  ; 
it  would  be  rather  the  pious  simplicity  of  the  com- 
piler, than  a  craftily-designed  fraud  ;  rather  an 
endeavour  to  fill  up,  as  well  as  possible,  the  gaps 
in  the  catalogues  of  popes,  in  which  little  heed  was 
given  to  the  contradictions  that  might  arise,  than 
any  set  purpose  to  represent  the  Pope  as  in  posses- 
sion of  a  universal  monarchy.  But  if  the  popes, 
from  the  year  440  to  530,  are  represented  as  judges 
and  teachers  of  faith  in  regard  to  the  Orientals 
(p.  130),  so  in  this  belief  men  were  most  fully  justi- 
fied by  the  Papal  epistles,  and  by  the  other  genuine 
documents  of  those  times.^^ 

The  famous  Deed  of  Donation  of  Constantino 
must,  we  are  told,  have  been  composed  in  Rome, 
and  by  a  cleric  of  the  Lateran  Church  (p.  132). 
Although  no  strong  proof  is  adduced  for  this 
assertion,  especially  as  many  documents  still  con- 
flict with  it  ;3^  although  nowhere  is  it  attested  that 

^^  The  notices  of  the  Liber  Pontificalis  might  very  well  furnish 
the  occasion  to  pseudo-Isidore  to  forge  special  Papal  briefs  ;  they 
could  further  his  deceit  (Janus,  p.  130).  But  of  themselves  these 
notices  could  certainly  not  make  any  change  in  ecclesiastical  dis- 
cipline, and  in  nowise  has  the  demon,  who  filled  the  breast  of  Isi- 
dore Mercator  or  Peccator,  for  any  length  of  time  before  inspired 
a  Roman  compiler. 

^2  So  Pope  Adrian  I,  (Cenni,  vol.  i.,  p.  353)  says,  that  the  pro« 


156  Roman  Forgeries, 

Pope  Stephen  III.  pressed  this  document  on  the 
attention  of  king  Pepin,  we  shall  not  enter  into  a 
discussion  on  this  subject.  But  when  it  is  further 
asserted,  that  not  only  the  Donation  of  Constantine 
was  made  use  of  in  754,  to  urge  on  the  Prankish 
king  Pepin  to  continue  his  policy  towards  Rome, 
and  to  make  new  donations,  but  that  twenty  years 
later  a  document  equally  spurious  was  presented 
to  his  son,  Charlemagne,  and  which  the  latter 
renewed  (p.  136)  ;  so  this,  indeed,  exceeds  all 
belief.  But  that  in  774  Charlemagne,  more  than 
thirty  years  of  age,  and  well-educated,  too,  should 
have  been  deceived  by  a  false  instrument  of  dona- 
tion which,  it  was  pretended,  had  proceeded  from 
his  own  father;  how  can  any  one  accept  such  a 
statement  without  the  most  decisive  proofs  t  A 
donation  Pepin  had,  at  all  events,  made  ;  and 
even  in  the  lifetime  of  that  king,  the  Pope,  in 
letters  addressed  to  him,  had  appealed  to  the 
fact.^^  That  the  the  Roman  Church  possessed 
many  and  rich  patrimonies  in  Italy,  which  had 
been  wrested  from  it,  and  were  subsequently 
restored,  is  likewise  beyond  all  doubt.  Judicious 
scholars  have  fully  recognized  the  reality  and  the 

perty  of  the  Roman  Church  has  been  granted  it  by  various  emperors, 
patricians,  and  godly  persons,  and  that  records  thereof  have  been 
preserved  in  Sacro  Scrinio  Lateranensi,  in  the  sacred  archives  of 
the  Lateran  Church.  Why  need  he  have  appealed  to  these  par- 
ticular documents,  if  he  had  before  him  the  extraordinary,  extensive, 
and  long-published  Donation  of  Constantine  ?  The  Pope  says,  in- 
deed, Constantine's  munificence  has  exalted  the  Roman  Church  ; 
but  we  know  from  Eusebius,  Athanasius,  and  others,  how  many 
gifts  this  emperor  made  to  the  more  celebrated  Churches.  The 
expression  "  restituere  "  (restore),  which  Janus  (p.  133)  refers  to,  it 
is  not  difficult  to  explain.  Many  patrimonies  the  Roman  Church 
previously  possessed,  and,  in  fact,  in  the  general  abandonment  of 
Italy,  she  had  exercised  the  rights  of  sovereignty.  Gosselin,  loc. 
cit,  vol.  i.,  p.  230,  seq.;  236,  242,  seq.,  vol.  ii.,  p.  421. 

"^^  Donationem  manu  vesträ  firmatam.     Steph.  ep.   ad.  Pipin.  7. 
Cenni.  Mon.  I.,  p.  81. 


Roman  Forgeries.  1 5  7 

genuineness  of  the  donation  of  Pepin/'^  This 
donation  was  enlarged  by  Charlemagne,  particu- 
larly in  regard  to  territories,  which  were  not  in  his 
power,  and  to  which  he  had  no  right.  But  they 
belonged  to  those  who,  under  Gregory  II.,  had 
given  themselves  up  to  the  Holy  See,  in  order,  in 
their  state  of  abandonment,  to  obtain  from  it  pro- 
tection. These  territories  Charles  promised  to 
restore,  although  this  promise  remained  for  the 
most  part  unfulfilled.^^  It  would  have  done  little 
credit  to  the  state  of  diplomacy  under  Lewis  I., 
Otho  I.,  and  Henry  II.,  if  it  had  blindly  given 
confirmation  to  spurious  documents.^^ 

The  epistle  to  the  Franks,  written  in  the  name 
of  St  Peter  (p.  134),  belongs  not  certainly  to  the 
class  of  *'  fictions."  It  is  a  document  written  in  a 
rhetorical  style,  and  easily  explicable  from  the 
state  of  severe  oppression  under  which  Rome  was 
then  labouring,  and  from  the  general  circumstances 
of  the  time.^^  In  Holy  Writ  not  merely  lifeless 
things  are  personified,  but  even  the  dead  are 
introduced  as  speaking ;  ^^  and  long  had  the  Popes 
been  in   the   habit  of  speaking  in   the   name   of 


^^  Hefele  III.,  541  seq.  Gosselin,  loc,  cit.  I,,  241  seq.  Cf.  Guizot, 
Hist,  de  la  Civilization  en  France.  Le9on.  27,  p.  316.  Pappen- 
cordt. Hist,  of  the  City  of  Rome  in  the  Middle  Ages.  Münster, 
1857,  p.  88,  137. 

^^  Gosselin,  loc.  ctt,  p.  251,  seq.  Pappencordt,  p.  99.  Döllinger's 
Manual  of  Church  History,  I.,  p.  409, 

=*6  Phillips's  Can.  Law,  v.,  §  244,  p.  697,  seq.  IH.,  §  119.  Th.  D. 
Mock  (de  Donatione  a  Carolo  M.  Sedi  Apostolicce  oblata. 
Monasterii  Brunn,  p.  102)  accepts  the  confirmation  of  Pepin's 
donation  by  Charlemagne,  yet  so  that  this  received  an  extension 
from  the  latter.  The  new  researches  on  this  subject  have,  as 
Janus  admits  (p.  147),  led  to  no  result,  entirely  overthrowing  these 
donations. 

2''  Gosselin  I.,  p.  237-240. 

^^  Cf.  Jerem.  xxxi.  15,  coll.  Matth.  ii.  18;  Isa.  xiv.  10  ;  Ezech. 
xxxii.  21,  scq. 


158  Roman  Forgeries. 

Peter,  and  referring  to  him  their  acts  ;  ^^  nay,  for 
every  Church  the  saint,  who  happened  to  be  its 
patron,  spoke  in  its  behalf.  This  letter,  therefore, 
is  not  so  strange,  and  Janus  himself  believes  that  it 
exerted  an  influence  in  the  Prankish  kingdom. 
Yet  all  this  is  for  us  a  matter  of  less  importance ; 
we  must  hasten  to  things  of  more  weight. 

Of  the  Pseudo-Isidorian-Decretals,  it  is  asserted 
by  Janus,  after  the  fashion  of  Febronius,'^°  that  they 
gradually  brought  about  a  complete  change  in  the 
constitution  and  government  of  the  Church  (p. 
97).  But  at  the  same  time  it  is  admitted,  that  in 
all  history  there  is  scarcely  a  second  example  to 
be  found  of  a  so  completely  successful,  and  withal 
so  clumsily  an  arranged  fiction.  Most  inquirers, 
however,  in  recent  times  have  called  in  question 
such  a  total  revolution  in  ecclesiastical  discipline, 
and  have  shown  that  the  spread  of  the  spurious 
collection  was  of  such  easy  accomplishment,  only 
because  it  corresponded  to  the  prevailing  views 
and  circumstances  of  the  times,  as  well  as  that  the 
immediate  and  real  design  of  the  author  was  not 
the  exaltation  of  the  See  of  Rome,  nor  the  exten- 
sion of  its  power.^^  The  last-named  fact,  indeed,  but 
this  only,  is  admitted  by  our  opponent  ;  but  the 
increase  and  extension  of  the  Papal  power  was, 
in  his  opinion,  the  meang  at  least  for  the  attainment 
of  his  immediate  design  (p.  97). 

But  what  were  the  destructive  principles  in  conse- 
quence whereof  the  Church  at  last  "was  necessarily 
to  assume  the  form  of  a  monarchy,  subject  to  the 

39  Defens.  declar.,  L.  iv.  c.  10. 

4»  De  Statu  Ecclesi^e,  c.  8,  §  7,  especially  n.  6.     Cf.  c.  v.,  §  3. 

41  Walter's  Can.  Law,  §  98.  Phillips's  Can.  Law,  iv.,  §  174,  p.  74, 
seq.  Schulte's  Can.  Law,  i.,  p.  302.  Cf.  Hinschius  Decretal.  Ps.- 
Isidori,  Lips.  1863.  Praef.  p.  ccxvii.,  stq.  DöUinger  (ii.  41-46), 
as  the  learned  Janus  says  (n.  43),  "has  assigned  reasons,  which 
seem  to  betray  an  inadequate  knowledge  of  the  Decretals." 


Roman  Forgeries.  159 

absolute  will  of  a  singular  individual  ?  "  They 
were  these:  Firstly,  every  synod  needs  the  approval 
or  confirmation  of  its  decrees  by  the  Pope. 
Secondly,  the  fulness  of  power  (thus  in  matters  of 
faith  also)  resides  in  the  Pope  alone.  Thirdly,  the 
bishops  are  but  ministering  assistants  to  the  Pope; 
but  he  is  the  bishop  of  the  whole  Universal  Church 
(p.  96).  Behind  these  dangerous  propositions 
lurks  the  ghost  of  infallibility,  as  even  the  popes  of 
pseudo-Isidore  assure  us — (but,  as  we  have  seen, 
they  were  neither  the  first,  nor  the  solitary  wit- 
nesses of  that  fact) — that  the  Roman  Church 
remains  intact  from  every  stain  of  error.  Let  us 
now  more  closely  examine  these  three  propositions. 
Rightly  understood,  the  first  proposition  involves 
a  perfectly  true  principle,  namely,  that  no  council 
is  valid  which  the  Pope  has  not  either  tacitly  or 
expressly  approved,'*^  and  that  synods  rejected 
by'~him,  possess  no  authority  in  the  Church. 
With  regard  to  General  Councils,  we  have 
already  proved  the  Papal  right  of  confirmation  ; 
and  many  provincial  councils,  too,  were  confirmed 
by  the  popes,'^^  as,  for  example,  by  Boniface  II., 
Leo  I.,  Gelasius,  and  Hormisdas ;  yet  in  regard  to 
them  the  principle  had  not  passed  into  universal 
practice,  nor  was  this  even  after  pseudo-Isidore  the 
case.  Yet  the  source  for  this,  we  are  told,  was  the 
Latin  translation  of  the  historian  Socrates,  in  which 
the  Italian  Epiphanius,  with  a  new  distortion  of  the 
w^ords  of  Pope  Julius,  already  distorted  by  that 
Greek  historian,  who  "  welcomed  an  opportunity 
of  pointing  out  the  ambition  of  the  Roman  Church," 

42  Phillips's  loc.  cit.,  p.  77,  79,  80.    Cf.  ir.,  §§  85,  86,  p.  244,  286. 

4=^  Thus  also  wrote,  in  416,  ihe  Fathers  of  Carthage  to  Pope 
Innocent  I.  (Inn.  ep.  26,  n.  I,  p.  869)  :  Hoc  intimandum  duximus, 
ut  statutis  nostrce  mediocritatis  etiam  Apostolicse  Sedis  adhibeatur 
auctoritas. 


i6o  Roman  Forgeries. 

had  made  that  Pope  declare  "  that  no  council  could 
be  held  without  his  consent"  (pp.  177,  118).  But 
in  this  reasoning  many  false  assumptions  are  com- 
bined ;  Socrates,  as  well  as  Sozomen,  lay  before 
Epiphanius,  not  the  former  only ;  and  he  has  not 
distorted,  as  alleged,  the  words  of  Pope  Julius/* 

4^  Compare  Hist,  tripart.  iv.  9  :  quum  itaque  regiila  ecclesiastica 
jubeat,  non  opoitere  prcBter  sentefitiam  Romani  Pontificis  Concilia 
celebrari  with  Sozom.  HE.,  iii.  10  :  dvai  70^  lepariKov  vößov  ws 
ÜKvpcL  cLTTOcpaiveLV  Tä  -rrapä  yvwfx-qv  TpaTTO/J-eva  TOv'Vwfxaiwv  einaKOTroy 
(for  there  is  a  sacerdotal  canon  which  declares  that,  whatsoever  is 
decreed  without  the  sanction  of  the  Bishop  of  Rome,  is  null  and 
void).  Oxford,  trans.  London,  Bagster,  1846.  We  here  find  that 
Sozomen  is  not  less  used  by  Epiphanius  than  Socrates.  We  are 
also  reminded  of  him  by  the  71st  Arabic  Nicene  canon,  edited  by 
Abraham  Echellensis  :  "  Nee  debere  pmter  assensum  Romani 
Episcopi  coT\c\\\?i  celebrari."  In  Socrates  (ii.  17),  we  read  as  fol- 
lows : — eTre/x^ßxj/aTO  (Julius)  irapa  Kavbvas  iroiowras,  Slötl  els  avvodov 
avTov  ovK  kKokeaav,  rod  eKKXrjaLaaTLKOv  Kavbvos  KeXevovros,  p-T]  öelv 
wapa  yvibp.rjP  rod  iiriaKOTrov  ttjs  'Poj^njs  Kavovi^eiv  ras  eKKXrjaias. 
(The  last  words  are  to  be  found  in  c.  viii.  also.)  Per  literas  respon- 
dit eos  contra  Ecclesiae  canones  egisse,  quod  ilium  ad  con- 
cilium non  vocassent  quippe  cum  canon  ecclesiasticus  vetet,  ne 
decreta  prceter  sententiam  episcopi  Romani  Ecclesiis  sanciantur. 
"Julius  replied  by  letters,  that  they  had  acted  contrary  to  the 
canons  of  the  Church,  in  not  having  invited  him  to  the  Council, 
since  the  ecclesiastical  canon  forbids  that  decrees  should  be  enacted 
by  the  Churches,  without  the  sanction  of  the  Bishop  of  Rome." 

Hefele  (Cone,  i.,  p.  7)  remarks  on  this  passage,  "  that,  if  we  con- 
sider the  matter  impartially,  there  can  be  no  doubt  that  by  the  word 
Y.o.vovlleiv  is  signified  the  setting  forth  of  general  decrees  by  and  at 
synods."  The  words,  "because  they  have  not  invited  him  to  the 
synod,"  determine  the  sense  more  closely.  Peter  de  Marca  (Concord. 
Sac.  et  Imp.  v.,  12,  i)  thought  the  words  of  the  Greek  historians 
are  too  much  amplified  ;  but  Gieseler  observes  (Church  Hist.,  ii., 
§  94,  p.  207),  that  the  then  practice  must  have  furnished  a  basis  for 
this  amplification.  Socrates  (L.  viii.,  c.  ii)  censures  the  bishops 
of  Rome  for  their  severity  towards  the  Novatians,  and  speaks  on 
that  occasion  of  their  hwacreLO.  (their  spirit  of  domination),  quite  like 
that  of  the  Alexandrine  bishops  ;  but  this  does  not  justify  us_  in 
assuming,  in  other  passages  of  his  writings,  an  intentional  distortion 
of  words  and  acts. 

As  regards  the  words  of  Pope  Julius,  it  is,  indeed,  said  :  ''  It  was 
necessary  to  have  written  to  us  all,"  ^5et  ypacpVjvaL  iraaiv  i]p.tv,  where 
the  question  regarded  the  sentence  on  so  many  deposed  bishops  ; 
but  in  the  subsequent  words  in  reference  to  the  Church  of  Alex- 


Ro7na7i  Forgeries.  i6i 

The  ecclesiastical  practice  described  by  us  shows 
that  in  the  fifth  century  the  interpretation  given  by 
these  historians  was  perfectly  justifiable.  The 
second  of  the  cited  propositions  has  likewise  been 
enunciated  elsewhere,  and  is  quite  conformable  to 
the  more  ancient  decretals/^  But  the  third  propo- 
sition, that  the  bishops  are  mere  ministering  assist- 
ants or  delegates  of  the  Pope,  does  not  agree  with 
many  declarations  elsewhere  found,  in  which  the 
pseudo-Isidore  derives  the  episcopal  power  imme- 
diately from  Christ  and  His  apostles;"*^  and  it  in  no 
way  belongs  to  this  ecclesiastical  system.  These 
three  propositions  in  themselves  have  been  unable 
to  accomplish  any  revolution  in  the  constitution  of 
the  Church. 

As  the  true  point  in  the  controversy  between 
more  ancient  and  more  modern  scholars  respecting 
the  influence  of  these  decretals,  w^e  have  an  indica- 

andria  (see  chapter  vii.  above,  note  19),  the  word  ttSö-i  (to  all)  fails. 
Hence  Coustant  (p.  385,  note  c.)  inferred,  that  it  was  only  over  the 
Bishop  of  Alexandria  the  Pope  alone  reserved  judgment  to  himself. 
This  statement,  however,  is  with  good  reason  contested  by  Bennettis 
(P.  II.,  t.  iii.,  pp.  174,  175),  who  for  his  part  declares  :  Itaque  S. 
Julius,  ut  insinuaret  rite  ad  tribunal  suum  trahi  denuo  debere,  quae 
inscio  se  et  inconsulto  in  synodo  orientali  de  episcoporum  causis 
actitata  erant,  suo  dumtaxat  usus  est  nomine  Nobis,  cui  paullo  ante 
pronomen  ortmibus  adjecerat,  ideo  ut  indicaret,  juxta  morem  Romano 
Pontifici  receptum,  ejusmodi  causas  prjesertim  a  veritate  facti  pen- 
dentes  finiri  in  concilio  consuevisse.  The  passages  of  Julius  are  to 
be  found  in  pseudo-Isidore  also  (p.  459-465,  ed.  Hinschii). 

■*5  Vigil.  (P.  IL,  c.  7,  p.  712,  ed.  Hinsch.)  is  taken  from  the 
decretals  of  Innocent  I.  and  of  Leo  I.,  ep.  14.  Cf.  Gregor,  iv., 
c.  II,  9,  6.  The  sollicitudo  omnium  ecclesiarum  Pope  Innocent  I. 
(in  ep.  30,  n.  1,2)  attributes  to  himself,  and  Pope  Siricius  also  (in 
ep.  6,  n.  i.,  p.  659)  the  cura  omnium  ecclesiarum.  The  fourth 
Lateran  Council  adjudges  to  the  Roman  Church  the  ordinarire 
potestatis  principatum.  The  confession  of  the  Emperor  Michael 
Palaeologus,  which  he  addressed  to  Pope  Gregory  X.  (Cone.  Lugd. 
ii.,  Hard,  vii.,  p.  696,  seg.)  assigns  to  the  Pontiff  the  plenitude 
potestatis.     Phillips'  Can.  Law,  vol.  v.,  §  201,  p.  9,  seg. 

^*'  Anaclet.,  ep.  ii.,  2  (xx.),  p.  77,  ep.  iii.,  3  (xxix.),  p.  82.  Jul.  I., 
ep.  9,  p.  461.     Phillips  18,  §  174,  p.  75. 

L 


102  Roman  Foro^erics 


s 


tion  as  to  the  earlier  forgeries  made  in  Rome,  of 
which  many  were  received  into  the  collection  of 
Isidore,  and  so  obtained  a  wider  diffusion  ;  but 
these  in  the  question  before  us  prove  nothing. 

Secondly,  we  find  a  remark  upon  "  the  contra- 
diction "  which  the  Isidorian  doctrine  involved,  as 
it  aimed  at  two  mutually  incompatible  things,  to 
wit,  the  perfect  independence  and  impunity  of 
bishops  on  the  one  hand,"^^  and  the  advancement  of 
the  Papal  power  on  the  other.  "  The  first  point  it 
sought  to  effect  by  such  strange  and  unpractical 
rules,  that  they  never  attained  any  real  vitality, 
while,  on  the  contrary,  the  principles  about  the 
power  of  the  Roman  See  worked  their  way,  and 
became  dominant  7mder  favoitrable  circumstances y 
but  with  a  result  opposed  to  the  views  of  Isidore, 
by  bringing  the  bishops  into  complete  subjection 
to  Rome  "  (p.  97). 

But  how  was  all  this  realized  }  Now  the  forged 
decretals  of  the  earliest  popes  were  "  eagerly  seized 
upon  by  Pope  Nicholas  I.  at  Rome,  to  be  used  as 
genuine  documents,  in  support  of  the  new  claims 
put  forward  by  himself  and  his  successors  "  (p.  95). 
But  while  the  Synod  of  Kiersy  in  857,  and  Hinc- 
mar,  archbishop  of  Rheims,  made  use  of  them,'*^ 
Pope  Nicholas  I.  was  not  yet  acquainted  with  them 
even  in  the  year  858,^^  nay,  not  even  in  Z6i.  It  v/as 
only  in  864  these  decretals  became  known  to  him 
through  Rothad,  bishop  of  Soissons  ;^°  and  in  this 
statement  Janus  also  concurs  (p.  98). 

*^  Here  it  has  been  forgotten  to  add,  of  whom  the  bishops  should 
be  independent,  and  in  what  quarter  they  should  be  inviolable.  An 
absolute  and  universal  inviolability  would  be  a  nonentity  ;  but  inde- 
pendence of  the  secular  power,  and  dependence  on  a  higher  spiritual 
authority,  would  not  be  "two  things  inwardly  incompatible." 

^^  Mansi,  xv.,  126.     Hard,  v.,  115.     Hefele  iv.,  192. 

"'^  Jaffe  Reg.,  n.  2016,  2051. 

^^  Weizsäcker  in  Sybel's  Historical  Periodical,  iii.  84.  Dilmmler's 
Hist,  of  Franconia,  vol.  i.,  p.  538,  seq.  (in  German). 


Roma7i  Forge7'ies.  163 

Nicholas,  "  who,"  we  are  told  "  exceeded  all  his 
predecessors  in  the  audacity  of  his  designs  "  (p.  98), 
must  be  classed  among  the  greatest  popes,  even 
though  he  did  not  rightly  interpret  the  seventeenth 
canon  of  Chalcedon  (p.  98).^'  But  it  is  precisely 
the  interpretation  which  he  gives  of  the  designa- 
tion, **  Exarch  "  (in  Latin  **  Primas"),  of  the  diocese, 
that  agrees  not  with  the  one  given  by  pseudo- 
Isidore,  who  distinguishes  the  primate  from  the 
Pope,^"  while  Nicholas  identifies  both.  The  charge 
of  the  "  most  daring,  though  little  noticed,  torturing 
of  a  single  word  against  the  sense  of  a  whole  code 
of  law,"  is  purely  imaginary.  For  the  proposition 
that  recurrence  must  be  had  to  a  higher  judge,  and 
that  for  bishops  the  Papal  See  is  the  ultimate 
tribunal,  Nicholas  I.  adduced  historical  precedents 
and  genuine  decretals  ;  the  mere  title  of  *'  Primas  " 
gave  to  the  Pope  nothing  which  he  had  not  long 
possessed.  Nor  is  it  anywhere  clearly  proved  that 
Nicholas,  although  he  used  spurious  writings  of  an 
earlier  date,  which  had  long  been  current,  ever 
made  use  of  pseudo-Isidore."  Nicholas,  indeed, 
disputed  the  view  advocated  by  Hincmar,^'^  that 
those  decretals,  which  were  not  in  the  received 
Codex  of  Adrian,  had  no  legal  force,  and  this  with 
perfect  justice  ;  for  thus  the  later  decrees  would 
have  been  excluded ;  and  to  reject  a  decretal 
merely  on  that  ground  was  certainly  inadmissible.^^ 

Nicholas  had  mostly  before  him  decretals  and 
testimonies  decidedly  genuine.^^    The  propositions 

5^  And  Canon  9.  Cf.  Hefele  ii.,  494-496.  Papce  Nicol.,  ep.  8, 
ad  Mich.  Imp. 

^2  Anicet.,  ep.  I,  c.  3,  p.  121  ;  Victor,  ep.  i,  c.  6,  p.  128,  ed. 
Hinschius. 

5=*  Blasco  de  Coll.  Isid.,  c.  4.  Ballerini,  loc.  cit.,  P.  III.,  c.  6,  §  i. 
0pp.  Leon,  iii.,  p.  ccxv. 

^*  Hincm.,  ep.  ad  Hincm.     Laud.  0pp.,  ii.,  543. 

*^  Nicol.,  ep.  42,  ad  Episc.  Gall.  Mansi.  xv.,  695.  Cf.  Phillips 
iv.,  p.  45  (in  Gratian,  c.  I,  §  I,  d.  19). 

^  In  the  Epistle  to  Charles  the  Bald  (Mansi.  i.  6^^,  Hard.  v. 


164  Roman  Forgeries, 

— that  without  the  previous  knowledge  of  the  See  of 
Rome,  no  national  synod  was  to  be  held  ; "  that 
every  accused  bishop  had  the  right  to  appeal  to 
the  Pope,  especially  from  suspected  and  hostile 
judges  ;  that  the  causes  majores  belonged  to  the 
jurisdiction  of  the  Roman  See  :  ^^ — these  proposi- 
tions are  all  more  ancient  than  pseudo-Isidore;  and 
Pope  Nicholas  had  no  need  of  him.^^  "  If,  indeed, 
all  Papal  utterances,  as  is  said,  were  a  rule  for  the 
whole  Church,  and  all  decrees  of  Councils  depended 
on  the  Pope's  good  pleasure,  as  Nicholas  asserted 
on  the  strength  of  the  Isidorian  forgery, — then 
there  would  be  but  one  step  farther,  to  the  promul- 
gation of  Papal  Infallibility  "  (p.  99).  Hence  the 
danger  of  those  utterances.  But  in  secular  affairs 
decisions  of  the  emperor  can  constitute  the  rule, 
and  decrees  of  the  diet  have  no  force  against  his 
veto  ;  must  we  then  assume  an  Imperial  Infalli- 
bility ?     But  Rome's  tradition,^"  Rome's  decrees/ 


585)  the  pseudo-lsidorian  Julius  is  said  to  have  been  cited  ;  but 
here  the  Pope  had  the  genuine  letter  of  Julius  and  Theodoret's 
History  of  the  Church  (II,,  c.  4)  before  his  eyes,  as  clearly  appears 
from  another  passage  in  Hardouin  (v.  167).  The  second  canon 
(C.  XV.,  q.  6)  belongs  to  Pope  Nicholas  IL 
^   ^7  Sermo  de  causa  Rothadi.     Hard.,  loc.  cit.,  585. 

^^  Here  has  pseudo-Isidore,  Pelag.  II.  (ep.,  p.  124,  H.) :  Majores 
vero  et  difificiles  quaestiones,  ut  S.  Synodus  statuit  et  beata  con- 
suetudo  exigit,  ad  Sedem  Apostolicam  semper  referantur.  This 
says  no  more  than  Innocent  I.  (ep.  2,  n.  6,  p.  74g,  750  Const.)  : 
Si  majores  causae  in  medium  fuerint  devolutse,  ad  Sedem  Apos- 
tolicam, sicut  synodus  (according  to  Coustant  Sardic.  in  ep.  ad. 
Jul.,  cap.  vii.,  n.  39)  statuit  et  beata  consuetudo  exigit,  post 
judicium  episcopale  referantur.  Elsewhere  we  find  antiqua  traditio 
(Innoc.  ep.  xxix.,  n.  i)  or  antiqua  regula  (ep.  xxx.,  n.  2). 

59  Phillips  iv.,  §  174,  pp.  78-84,  85,  seq. 

^"  Innoc.  I.,  ep.  25,  ad  Decent.,  n.  2,  p.  856  ;  Quis  enim  nesciat 
aut  non  advertat,  id  quod  a  principe  Ap.  Petro  Romanas  ecclesiae 
traditum  est  ac  nunc  usque  custoditur,  ab  omnibus  debere  servari  ? 

^^  Siric,  ep.  i,  n.  3,  p.  627,  seq.  :  Nunc  praefatam  regulam 
teneant  ouines  sacerdotes,  que  nolunt  ab  apostolicae  petrae,  super  quam 
Christus  universalem  construxit  Ecclesiam,  soliditate  divelli. 


Ro7nan  Forcreries.  i6 


ö> 


were  even  from  an  early  period  the  standard  of 
doctrine  ;  the  Roman  Church  was  the  head  of  the 
whole  body  ;  ^'^  the  synods  rejected  by  her  never 
found  recofjnition.  Where  is,  then,  the  fri^jhtful 
innovation  ?  Even  in  1085,  the  false  Decretals  had 
yet  little  weight  in  Rome,  as  is  apparent  from  the 
synod  of  Gerstungen.^^  If  no\w  French  and  German 
bishops,  whether  in  their  individual  capacity,  or  at 
synods,  from  the  ninth  to  the  eleventh  century, 
appealed  to  these  decretals  \^^  so  certainly  the  new 
maxims  of  ecclesiastical  legislation  had  not  been 
imposed  on  them  by  Rome,  least  of  all  at  a  time 
when  Rome  was  in  so  lamentable  a  condition  ; 
rather,  they  had  laid  the  yoke  on  themselves  (p.  100). 
When,  then,  the  Popes  in  the  eleventh  century  cited 
likewise  those  decretals,  whose  authenticity  among 
their  contemporaries,  and  even  for  two  centuries, 
had  remained  indisputed,  what  blame  can  they 
incur  ?  Is  it  that  in  historical  criticism  they  were 
not  far  in  advance  of  their  age  ?  If,  as  our  authors 
pretend,  the  want  of  historical  perception  was 
constantly,  and  from  of  old,  the  defect  of  Rome  f'^ 
how  can  they  then  allege,  as  an  imputation  against 
that  very  Rome,  that  it  gave  credit  to  fictions, 
which  had  found  general  acceptance,  and  which 
corresponded  to  the  existing  state  of  the  Church  ? 
But  new  fictions  were  ever  piled  up.  On  a  bad 
foundation  a  bad  building  only  can  spring  up. 
This  Janus  teaches  us  more  by  what  he  has  really 
achieved  himself,  than  by  what  he  pretends  to 
prove.     Springing  over  several  intermediate  links, 

*'^  Siric,  ep.  ad  Him.,  n.  20,  p.  637  ;  Romana  Ecclesia  caput 
corporis.     Cf.  Bonif.  L,  i  ep.  14,  n.  i,  p.  1037. 

^^  Kunstmann  in  the  "  Theological  Journal  of  Freiburg  "  (iv.,  p. 
116,  seq).     Phillips's,  loc.  cit. .,  p.  86. 

^  Hefele,  Cone.  IV.,  pp.  317,  365,  473,  483,  533,  548,  609. 

**  Nay,  we  are  told  (Janus,  p.  204)  there  were  kinds  of  historical 
information  unattainable  in  those  times  (namely,  the  Middle  Ages). 


1 66  Ro7nan  Forgeries. 

the  collection  of  canon  laws  dedicated  to  the 
Milanese  Anselm,  that  of  Regino  of  Prüm,  that  of 
Burkard  of  Worms,  who  is  first  named  at  p.  143, 
our  newhistorianof  ecclesiastical  law  (p.  102), passes 
to  Anselm  of  Lucca,  who  died  in  the  year  1086, 
and  who  appears  to  him  as  the  founder  of  the 
**  New  Gregorian  Canon  Law."  This  canonist, 
we  are  told,  "  through  a  tissue  of  fresh  inventions 
and  interpolations,  altered  the  law  of  the  Church 
in  accordance  with  the  requirements  oi  his  party, — 
and  the  point  of  view  of  Gregory"  (p.  102).  Thus 
not  even  pseudo-Isidore  was  enough  for  the  in- 
satiable party  ;  after  200  years  it  needed  again  a 
new  transformation.  It  was  only  mediately  Anselm 
of  Lucca  made  use  of  pseudo-Isidore  ;  his  first  six 
books  he  took  from  the  collection  dedicated  to 
Anselm  of  Milan  ;  and  the  following  books  he  took 
from  Burkard  of  VVorms.^^  To  the  latter  a  greater 
importance  ought  to  have  been  adjudged  ;  and 
Anselm,  the  nephew  of  Alexander  II.,  whose  work, 
like  those  of  Cardinals  Deusdedit  and  Gregory, 
had  little  circulation  (p.  143),  had  thus  not  the 
importance  of  a  "  founder  of  the  new  Gregorian 
Canon  Law ;"  his  work  was  not  the  most  import- 
ant (p.  103).  Moreover,  in  competition  with  him, 
there  were  Bonizo,  Deusdedit,  and  Gregory  of 
Pavia  (p.  103),  nay,  Gregory  VII.  himself  in  his 
thesis  called  the  "  Dictatus  "  (p.  107). 

Although  it  is  very  doubtful  whether  the  brief 
remarks  of  Giesebrecht  ^''  have  fully  settled  the 
question  as  to  the  authorship  of  this  work,^^  yet  for 
Janus  the  matter  is  decisively  established.   Gregory 

^^  Phillips,  loc.  cii.,  §  177,  pp.  128,  129.  Moreover  he,  like 
Deusdedit,  drew  a  part  of  his  materials  from  the  Roman  Archives. 
Ibid.  129,  130. 

^'^  The  "Munich  Historical  Annals,"  1866,  p.  149. 

^*  Janssen  in  the  "Journal  of  Theological  Literature,"  1867, 
p.  821  (in  German).     Cf.  Hefele  v.  67. 


Roman  Forgeries.  167 

VII.,  who  inaugurated  a  new  epoch,  exercised  his 
pontifical  power  in  a  way  corresponding  with  his 
ideas.  "  Little  familiar  as  he  was  with  theological 
questions,  we  are  told,  he  must  have  held  the  pre- 
rogative of  infallibility  to  be  the  most  precious  jewel 
of  his  crown"  (p.  iii).  "That  Papal  Infallibility 
might  be  more  firmly  believed,  personal  sanctity 
was  also  ascribed  to  every  Pope  :  a  sanctity  which 
Gregory  made  the  foundation  of  his  claim  to 
universal  dominion, ^^and  in  furtherance  of  thisclaim, 
asserted  the  sinful  origin  of  royalty  "  (p.  113).^°  If 
Gregory  appealed  to  documents  and  to  narratives/' 
which  cannot  stand  the  test  of  criticism  (p.  107)  ; 
so  the  circumstance  is  overlooked,  that  he  did  not 
fabricate  those  documents  and  narratives,  but 
found  them  already  in  existence ;  that  his  contem- 
poraries held  them  to  be  genuine  ;  and  even  that 
not  all  which  is  declared  interpolated,  is  really  so.^^ 
Every  inaccurate  citation  is  imputed  to  him  as  a 
crime.  He  unduly  extended,  we  are  told,  the 
effects  of  excommunication  (p.  120);  whereas  before 
him,  and  before  pseudo-Isidore,  the  discipline  in 
this  matter  was  much  severer/^  Nay,  it  was  pre- 
cisely Gregory  who  in  so  far  mitigated  it,  that 
members  of  a  household,  women,  children,  all,  in 
fact,  who  were  incapable  of  confirming  the  sinner 
in  his  bad  sentiments,  were  allowed  to  hold  inter- 

^^  Bianchi  {op.  cit.,  t.  i.,  L.  ii.,  §  lO,  n.  3,  p.  280,  seq.),  has  accur- 
ately examined  this  charge. 

^"  Vide  Bianchi,  loc.  cit.,  n.  2,  p.  275,  seq.  :  where  it  is  shown 
that  other  expressions  also  of  Gregory  VII.  are  opposed  to  these  ; 
and  hence  the  latter  are  to.be  explained  in  a  limited  sense,  according 
to  the  analogy  of  the  words  of  Augustine  and  of  Gregory  the 
Great. 

^^  Particularly  the  8th  book,  ep.  21,  ad  Herm.  Metens. 

^2  Against  Launoius  (Janus,  p.  114,  n.  53),  see  Anthony  Charlas, 
Tract  de  Libertatibus  Eccles.  Gallican?e,  ii.,  B.  vii.  c.  6,  10, 
3d  ed.      Romoe,  1720.     Bianchi,  loc.  cii.,  §  II,  p.  287,  seq. 

72  Vide  proofs  in  Gosselin,  loc.  cit.,  p.  ii.,  c.  i,  a.  3,  p.  77,  seq. 


1 68  Roman  Foi^geries. 

course  with  the  excommunicated/'^  That  princes, 
no  less  than  the  rest  of  the  faithful,  were  liable  to 
excommunication,  was  never  doubted  in  the 
Church/^  As  to  the  claims  of  the  Popes  over 
Spain,  Hungary,  Russia,  Saxony,  and  Provence, 
the  expressions  relative  thereto  have  long  been 
duly  appreciated''^  (p.  285). 

But  let  us  return  to  the  collections  of  Canon 
Law.  Whatever  we  know  respecting  these  from 
the  times  of  Anselm,  bishop  of  Lucca,  down  to 
those  of  Gratian,  in  no  way  justifies  us  to  assume 
an  intentional  fraud  (p.  105),  or  a  new  forgery.  In 
the  age  of  Gregory  VIL  the  testimonies  for  the 
plenitude  of  the  Papal  power  were  so  numerous, 
that  a  forgery  in  these  would  have  been  quite 
superfluous,  and  have  answered  no  end.  If  Deus- 
dedit  (p.  103)  and  so  many  others  derived  all 
ecclesiastical  jurisdiction  from  Peter,  they  said  no 
more  than  what  the  most  ancient  Popes  six 
hundred  years  before  had  affirmed. ^^  If  they 
taught  that  all  decrees  of  the  Apostolic  See  were 
so  to  be  received,  as  if  they  were  confirmed  by  the 
very  voice  of  Peter  (p.  104);^^  they  said  no  more 

^*  Greg.  Syn.  Rom.  iv.,  c.  4.  Mansi.  xx.,  504,  seq.  Hefele  v. 
108.     Gosselin,  loc.  cit.,  p.  100. 

^^  Cf.  Cone.  Rom.  Greg.,  v.  998,  999,  c.  i.  Mansi.  xix,  223. 
Baron.,  a.  998,  n.  3.  Defensio  Deelar.  Cleri.  Gallic,  t.  i.,  P.  ii., 
L.  vi.,  c.  27. 

^^  Bianchi,  t.  i.,  L.  ii.,  §  14,  seq.,^^.  352,  seq. 

"^"^  Sirie.,  ep.  5,  n.  i,  p.  651,  Constant :  per  quem  (Petrum)  et 
apostolatus  et  episcopatus  in  Christo  cepit  exordium.  Innoc.  I., 
ep.  2,  ad  Victric.,  n.  2,  p.  747  :  Adjuvante  S.  A  p.  Petro,  per  quem 
et  apostolatus  et  episcopatus  in  Christo  cepit  exordium.  Ep.  29,  ad 
PP.  Carthag.,  n.  i,  p.  888  :  a  quo  ipse  episcopatus  et  tota  auctor- 
itas  nominis  hujus  emersit.  Bonifac.  I.,  ep.  4,  p.  1019  :  B.  Ap. 
Petrus,  cui  arx  Sacerdotii  Dominica  voce  concessa  est.  Ep,  14, 
n.  I,  p.  1037  :  Institutio  universalis  nascentis  Ecclesise  de  B.  Petri 
sumpsit  honore  principium,  in  quo  regimen  ejus  et  summa  consistit. 
Ex  ejus  enim  ecclesiastica  disciplina  per  omnes  ecclesias,  religionis 
jam  crescente  cultura,  fonte  manavit. 

''^  "  Consequently  infallible,"  adds  Janus,  who  supplies  the  Infalli- 
bilists  with  more  weapons  than  they  before  used.     The  passage  is 


Roman  Foi'gerics.  169 

than  what  all  antiquity  pronounced,  when  it  heard 
Peter  speak  by  the  mouth  of  Leo,  and  by  the 
mouth  of  Agatho  ;  when  it  ascribed  the  acts  of 
Popes  to  Peter,  as  occurs  in  hundreds  of  docu- 
ments, where  Peter  and  the  Pope  appear  as  one 
person. ^^  The  elder  compilers  of  Canon  Law, 
from  the  ninth  century  down  to  the  decretals  of 
Gratian  inclusively,  who,  according  to  our  Janus 
(p.  143),  not  only  received  in  good  faith  the  old 
forgeries,  but  even  added  new  corruptions,  sought 
to  furnish  but  the  greatest  possible  quantity  of 
materials.  They  admitted  even  self-contradictory 
passages,  canons  rejected  by  the  Roman  Church, 
as  well  as  the  later  Apostolic  Canons,  and  those 
of  the  Council  in  Trullo,  and  others,^"  and  evinced 
in  this  matter  rather  an  unsystematic  procedure, 
than  premeditated  fraud.  Yet  even  this,  as  much 
as  possible,  is  made  to  subserve  the  purposes  of 
obstinate,  tenacious  prejudice.  Anselm  of  Lucca,^' 
and    Gregory   of    Pavia,  as    after   them    Gratian, 

found  in  Gratian,  c.  2,  d.  19.  That  also  c.  12,  C.  xxiv.,  q,  i 
(pseudo-Isidore.  Sixtus  II.)  says  nothing  new,  as  shown  by  Phillips 
(II.,§89,  p.  321). 

"  To  the  passages  already  cited  others  may  still  be  added.  Pope 
Bonifac.  I.,  ep.  13.  Rufo.,  n.  I,  p.  1034  :  B.  Apostolus  Petrus 
ecclesiae  Thessalonicensi  cuncta  commisit ;  ep.  15,  n.  i,  p.  1039: 
Manet  B.  Ap.  Petrum  per  sententiam  Dominicam  universalis 
EcclesijE  ab  hoc  sollicitudo  suscepta,  quippe  quam  Evangelio  teste 
in  se  noverit  esse  fnndatam,  nee  unquam  ejus  honor  vacuus  esse 
potest  curarum,  cum  certum  sit,  summam  rerum  ex  ejus  delibera- 
tione  pendere  ;  n.  7,  p.  1044  :  cujus  (Perigenis  Episcopi)  sacer^ 
dotium  Ap,  Petrus  semel  jam  Spiritus  sancti  suggestione  firmavit. 

^  Cf.,  for  example,  c.  4,  d.  16  (Trull.,  c.  2)  ;  c.  6,  d.  22  (Trull., 
36)  ;  c.  14,  d.  28  (Can.  Ap.,  6)  ;  c.  16,  ead.  (Trull,,  c.  26)  ;  c.  13, 
d.  31  (Trull.,  c.  13)  ;  c.  7,  d.  32  (Trull.,  6) ;  c.  15,  d.  34  (Can.  Ap., 
18)  ;  c.  I,  d.  35  (App.,  43,  44) ;  c.  3,  d.  44  (Trull.",  c.  9)  ;  c.  i,  d.  47 
(Can.  Ap.,  44)  ;  c.  4,  d.  55  (C.  Ap.,  22,  23) ;  c.  4,  d.  77  (Trull., 
c.  15)  ;  c.  26,  d.  93  (Trull.,  c.  7)  ;  c.  ic»,  C.  i.,  q.  i  (Trull.,  c.  23) ; 
c.  45,  C.  vii.,  q.  I  (Syn.  Phot.,  879,  Can.  ii.,  Ivo  Camot.,  P.  vii., 
c.  149)- 

8^  The  view  of  Papal  Infallibility  Anselm  rested,  not  on  the  false 
decretals,  but  on  the  text  of  St  Luke  xxii.  32.  Bennettis,  P.  I,, 
vol.  ii.,  p.  344. 


170  Roman  Fo7^gc7'ies, 

admitted  into  their  codes  the  passages  from 
Jerome  as  to  the  small  distinction  between  bishops 
and  priests  ;  and  "  that  thereby  the  axe  was  laid 
at  the  root  of  the  Roman  Primacy,  those  short- 
sighted architects  of  the  Papal  system  failed  to 
perceive"  (p.  206).  They  yet,  however,  were  so 
crafty,  so  far-sighted,  that  they  thereby  aimed  at 
a  great  result ;  "  for  all  they  wanted  was  to  have 
the  way  for  the  superiority  of  Cardinals,  and 
with  it  the  domination  of  the  Curia,  and  to  build 
up  the  Papal  system  on  the  ruins  of  the  ancient 
episcopal  system "  (p.  207).  In  consequence  of 
this  revolution,  "  bishops,  towards  the  end  of  the 
thirteenth  century,  were  brought  to  allow  them- 
selves to  be  made  cardinal-presbyters,  and  even 
to  regard  as  a  promotion  this  degradation  of 
the  Episcopate  to  the  Presbyterate "  (p.  207). 
To  this,  indeed,  a  parallel  might  be  found  in  the 
Greek  Church,  and  even  already  in  the  eleventh 
century,  when  the  office  of  Syncellus  was  an  object 
of  ambition  to  themetropolitans;  and  intheyear  1029 
a  contest  about  the  precedency  of  the  Syncelli  over 
the  latter  sprang  up.^^  *'  The  injurious  creation  of 
the  Cardinalate  "  (p.  212),^^  but  which,  however,  was 
nothing  less  than  sudden,  has  hitherto  appeared  to 
many  as  commanded  by  the  circumstances  of  the 
eleventh  century  ;  and  whoever  compares  the  Papal 
elections  after  the  year  1059  with  the  earlier  ones, 
will  feel  himself  obliged  to  confess  that  that  institu- 
tion has  rendered  great  services  to  the  Church.^'^ 
Gratian's  celebrated  Decretum  became  the  manual 

^*  Cedren.  ii.,  p.  486,  seq.  Thomassin.,  P.  I.,  L.  ii.,  c.  loi, 
n.  6,  seq. 

^^  Copious  details  on  this  subject  in  Phillips  (Can.  Law,  vol.  vi., 
§  267,  seq.,  p.  63,  seq)  _ 

***  Cardinal  Deusdedit  also  (Janus,  p.  ill)  had  previously  sought  to 
glorify  this  institution,  and  to  vindicate,  on  a  vacancy  in  the  Papal 
See,  the  government  of  the  Church  for  the  College  of  Cardinals. 


Roman  Forgeries.  i  7 1 

and  law-book  of  the  western  world,  not  by  "the 
means  applied  by  the  Curia"  (p.  148),  but  by  its 
utility,  and  by  its  reception  in  schola  ct  foroP  No 
one  denies  that  the  monk  of  Bologna  was  deficient 
in  historical  criticism  ;  but  no  one,  again,  can  prove 
that  his  work  was  intended  to  be  a  fraud.  The 
genuine  passages  from  Justinian's  law-books,  from 
Greek,  Spanish,  African,  Prankish,  and  other 
councils  ;  from  doctors  of  the  Church,  like  Augus- 
tine, Jerome,  Isidore  ;  from  decretals  of  Popes 
Innocent  I.,  Leo.  L,  Gelasius,  Gregory  the  Great, 
Nicholas,  Leo  IX.,  and  his  successors,^^  in  number 
and  weight  exceed  the  spurious  ones.  Of  the 
popes  of  later  times  copious  texts  are  given  ;^^  but 
that  false  documents  should  be  taken  by  Gratian 
from  his  predecessors,  when  their  authenticity  was 
unquestioned  by  his  contemporaries,  cannot  be 
imputed  to  him  as  a  crime.  What  holds  good  of 
the  thirteenth  and  fourteenth  centuries,  that  no  one 
then  divined  the  true  state  of  things,  nor  thought 
of  forgeries  and  fictions  (p.  253,  G.),  applies  like- 
wise, and  with  equal  reason,  to  the  preceding  ages. 
Among  other  things,^^  Janus  takes  great  offence 

^^  Never  was  the  decretum  of  Gratian  regarded  by  canonists  as  a 
regular  law-book  ;  and  criticism  in  regard  to  it  could  act  with  per- 
fect freedom.  Placid.  lioeckhn  Controv.  Jurisprud.,  L.  i.,  tit.  2,  p. 
1090.  Berti  de  theol.  disc,  B.  xx.,  c.  18.  Bennettis,  P.  IL,  vol. 
iii.,  p.  211.     Schulte,  Man.  of  Can.  Law,  2d  ed.,  §  14,  p.  39,  n.  4. 

^  Against  these  popes  in  particular,  it  is  made  a  charge  that  they 
declared  simony  to  be  a  heresy.  Cf.  J^nus  (p.  298  G.)  But  the  ex- 
pression simoniaca  hoeresis  is  more  ancient  ;  it  already  occurs  in  an 
epistle  of  Pope  John  viii.,  in  the  ninth  century  (ep.  95,  ad  episc. 
Gall.  Mansi.  xvii.,  p.  83). 

**'  Urban  II.  and  Alexander  II.,  c.  8,  9,  C.  i.,  q.  3  ;  c.  4,  5,  C. 
ix.,  q.  I  ;  Paschal  IL,  c.  I,  C.  xiv.,  q.  2  ;  c.  47,  C.  xvi.,  q.  I  ;  c.  5, 
C.  XXX.,  q.  3  ;  Innocent  IL,  c.  29,  C.  xvii.,  q.  4  ;  c.  25,  C.  xviii., 
q,  2  ;  c.  5,  C.  xxi.,  q.  4 ;  c.  40,  C.  xxvii.,  q.  I,  et  seq. 

^  On  the  passage  cited  at  p.  161  (see  xvi.,  C.  xxv.,  q.  i).  Cf. 
Merkle  in  the  Augsburg  Pastoral  Journal,  2d  Oct.  1869,  No.  40. 
Besides,  many  various  readings  are  used,  as  they  are  so  frequently  to 
be  found  in  many  ancient  manuscripts.     Cf.  Coustant  (note  B.  to 


172  Roman  Forgeries, 

at  the  second  part  of  Gratian's  Decretum  (Causa, 
xxiii.,  9,  4-6).  The  case  here  supposed  is  as  fol- 
lows : — Catholic  bishops,  together  with  their  people, 
are  by  threats  and  torments  constrained  to  embrace 
heresy  by  bishops,  who  have  themselves  fallen  into 
heresy.  Prelates,  armed  by  the  emperor  with 
secular  jurisdiction,  march  into  the  field  at  the 
Pope's  command,  for  the  protection  of  Catholics, 
slay  numbers  of  the  enemy,  take  others  prisoners, 
and  bring  several  heretics  by  violence  back  to  the 
Church.  In  this  imagined  case  several  questions 
arise.  First,  Is  the  waging  of  war  sinful }  Secondly, 
What  sort  of  war  is  just }  Thirdly,  Is  a  wrong  in- 
flicted on  allies  to  be  repelled  by  force  of  arms } 
In  all  these  cases  reasons  for  and  against  are  given. 
The  fourth  question  is :  Is  it  lawful  to  take  ven- 
geance t  Then  follow  passages  from  Augustine 
and  others  on  the  toleration  of  the  wicked.  The 
chief  passages  in  reference  to  the  punishment  of 
heretics  are  taken  from  Augustine.^^  The  fifth 
question  is.  Whether  a  judge  can  allow  criminals 
to  be  put  to  death  t  Here  again  two  dift*erent 
views  are  advocated  ;  first  come  passages  from  the 
above-named  father  of  the  Church,  and  others,  that 
the  wicked  are  to  be  punished,  but  not  to  be  put  to 
death.  In  the  last  of  these  passages,  Janus  (p.  147) 
discovers  a  falsification  of  Gratian's,  m  this  sense, 
"that  the  Church  should  protect  homicides  and 
murderers.''  This  charge  of  falsification  he  founds  on 
the  fact,  that  in  Burkard  and  Ivo,  according  to  the 

Innoc.  I.,  ep.  2,  n.  5,  p.  749).  If  Gratian  (c.  7,  d.  96)  quoted  the 
narrative  of  Rufinus,  that  had  been  long  used  by  others,  respecting 
the  words  of  the  Emperor  Constantine  as  to  bishops  in  general,  and 
referred  them  to  the  Pope  (Janus,  p.  no);  so  there  was  here  no 
falsification.  Nay,  among  bishops  the  Pope  also  was  included,  and 
in  truth  he  is  the  first  bishop  ;  and  it  was,  moreover,  in  the  spirit 
of  the  eleventh  and  twelfth  century,  to  conclude  a  7ninoi-i  ad  niajus. 
^^  C.  37,  seq.^  C.  xxiii.,  q.  4. 


Roman  Forgeries,  173 

Roman  correctors,  there  is  a  negative  which  in  our 
text  of  Gratian  is  omitted.^ 

But  what  purpose  should  such  a  forgery  serve  ? 
In  the  following  text  of  Gratian,  which,  from  what 
had  been  previously  said,  will  only  support  the 
view  that  criminals  should  not  be  punished  with 
death  and  mutilation,  there  succeeds  another 
authority  for  the  opposite  opinion,  that  capital 
punishment  ought  to  be  inflicted,  and  therewith 
ulterior  inquiries  are  connected.  Accordingly, 
Gratian  has  not  touched  the  reason  assigned,  to 
wit,  "  lest  the  Church  should  have  a  share  in  blood- 
shed," a  reason  which  perhaps  appeared  to  him  in- 
compatible with  that  negative.  The  bloodshed 
could  be  applied  as  well  to  the  murder  perpetrated 
by  the  criminal,  as  to  the  massacre  arising  from  his 
apprehension,  when  he  took  refuge  in  a  Church. 
A  misunderstanding  could  easily  occur,  or  an  error 
of  the  copyist  ;  but  in  any  case  the  sequel  shows 
that  here  by  a  forgery  Gratian  neither  could  nor 
wished  to  gain  anything.  He  cites  scriptural 
texts  for  the  permission  accorded  to  sovereigns  to 
put  criminals  to  death  ;  and  these  texts  are  followed 
by  passages  from  the  Fathers,  and  he  concludes  as 
follows  :  If  thus  the  saints  and  the  civil  powers,  in 
waging  war,  do  not  violate  the  prohibition  against 
killing,  although  on  criminals  of  all  kinds  they  in- 
flict merited  death  ;  if  the  soldier,  in  obeying  his 
superiors,  and  in  slaying  a  wicked  man,  is  not 
guilty  of  murder  ;  if  the  punishment  of  murderers 
and  poisoners  is  not  bloodshed,  but  the  execution 
of  the  laws;  if  those  who,  from  zeal  for  the  Catholic 
Church,  slay  the  excommunicated,  are  not  judged 

^  C.  7,  C.  cit.,  q.  5  :  Greg.  P.  Reos  sangnine  defendat  (Ivo.  Burc, : 
non  defendat)  Ecclesia,  ne  effusione  (al.  effusionis)  sanguinis  parti- 
ceps  fiat. 


1 74  Roman  Forgeries, 

as  murderers;  so  it  is  clear  that  the  wicked  may  not 
only  be  scourged,  but  executed  also.^' 

From  this  Gratian  turns  to  the  question  ;  whether 
even  private  individuals  can,  without  legal  author- 
ity, put  others  to  death.  Thus  in  these  passages 
he  treats  of  the  public  authority  of  the  State,  and 
not  immediately  of  the  Church  ;  and  "■  the  general 
conclusion  "  is  taken  not  merely  from  the  suspicious 
words  of  Pope  Urban  11.,^''  as  Janus  (p.  147)  asserts, 
but  from  the  previously  cited  passages  from  Augus- 
tine, Pelagius,  Nicholas,  and  others.  Moreover, 
with  regard  to  proceedings  against  religious  dis- 
senters, Gratian  could  the  less  seek  to  bring  any- 
thing new  forward,  as  on  that  point  "  he  chiefly 
followed  Ivo  of  Chartres  "  (p.  235),  who  "though 
in  certain  important  articles  he  held  to  the  old 
Church  law"  (p.  103,  n.  3),  yet  "adopted  into  his 
Decretals  a  copious  store  of  spurious  pieces,"  and 
announced  the  most  perfect  submission  to  the 
Roman  Church  (p.  261). 

Over  the  noble  collection  of  Decretals  instituted 
by  Pope  Gregory  IX.,  Janus  passes  very  quickly  ; 
he  uses  it  only  to  bring  forward  divers  charges 
against  particular  popes.  For  all  the  mediaeval 
canonists  he  evinces  a  marked  repugnance.  "  In 
the  long  period  from  1230  to  1530,  th.Q parasites  of 
the  Roman  Curia  cultivated  and  ruled  the  domain 
of  canon  laiu  as  interpreters  of  the  new  codes  "  (p. 
232).  "The  world  wdiS  poiso7ted  by  the  Bolog7iese 
school  of  lawp  and  by  the  Roman  Curia  "  (p.  204). 
"  To  the  Papal  court-jurists  and    canonists  were 

^^  Grat,  post  can,  48,  C.  et,  op.  cit. 

'^-  C.  47,  Excommunicatorum  loc.  cit.  Here  a  struggle  for  the 
Church  is  presupposed  ;  the  preceding  canon  treats  of  war  against 
unbehevers. 

'*=*  The  expressions  of  Savigny,  and  of  the  Jurists  and  Canonists 
following  him,  must  then  be  corrected  !  1 


Roman  Forgeries.  175 

added,  after  the  thirteenth  century,  the  Papal 
court-historiographers,  hke  Martinus  Polonus,  and 
Tolomeo  of  Lucca  "  (p.  284).  "  From  that  cen- 
tury down  to  the  fifteenth,  historical  knowledge 
became  obscured  by  means  of  the  Mendicant 
Orders,  and  since  their  rise  the  credulous  mania 
for  miracles  became  more  prevalent."  It  was 
desired  to  mould  the  forgeries  and  fictions  of 
pseudo-Isidore,  of  Gratian,  and  of  the  Decretals, 
into  a  coherent  history,^"^  and  to  supplement  by 
the  fable  of  the  institution  of  the  electors  by 
Gregory  V.,  the  theory  of  translations  invented  by 
Alexander  III.  and  Innocent  III."  (p.  282).^^  To 
the  Papal  court-jurists  and  court-historiographers^^ 
must  lastly  be  added  the  court-theologians,  and 
pre-eminently  the  schoolmen  of  the  Mendicant 
Orders. 

But  here  again  there  were  ''  forgeries."  In  order 
to  match  the  Greeks,  recourse  was  had  to  a  special 
expedient.  "  A  Latin  theologian,  probably  a 
Dominican,  who  had  resided  among  the  Greeks, 
composed  a  catena  of  spurious  passages  from  the 
Greek  Councils  and  Fathers,  in  w^hich  the  novel 
Papal  claims  were  to  receive  a  dogmatic  basis" 
(p.  264).  These  false  testimonies  were  used  by 
Thomas  Aquinas  ;  resting  upon  them,  "  he  intro- 
duced the  doctrine  of  the  Pope  and  of  his  infalli- 
bility into  his  dogmatic  work"  (p.  266)  ;  and  upon 
this  foundation,  as  well  as  out  of  the  forgeries  in 

^*  So  far  had  men  then  already  come.  We  were  of  opinion  that 
this  thought  was  but  of  later  origin,  and  that  the  need  of  historical 
accuracy  was  not  then  felt. 

95   Vide  thereupon  Phillips'  Can.    Law  iii.,  §  119,  p.  53,  §   129, 

p.  195- 

^^  On  the  mention  of  Martinus  Polonus,  Janus  points  out  that  he 
with  others  related  how  Sylvester  II.,  by  a  compact  with  the  devil, 
had  attained  to  the  Papal  dignity  (p.  251).  But  the  fable  is  certainly 
older,  as  the  pseudo-Cardinal  Benno  already  shows.  See  DoUinger, 
Papstfabeln,  p.  156,  seq.,  Bennettis,  P.  ii.,  t.  v.,  p.  712,  seq. 


1 76  Roman  Forgeries, 

Gratlan,  "he  built  up  his  Papal  system  "  (p.  267). 
Thomas  Aquinas,  as  afterwards  Cajetan  and  Mel- 
chior Canus,  rested  upon  fictions  exclusively  (p. 
393) ;  and  Turrecremata  is  dependent  upon  these 
fictions,  and  upon  Thomas  Aquinas  (p.  310,  G.) 
So  this,  then,  would  be  the  origin  of  the  dogmatic 
statements  respecting  the  plenitude  of  power  and 
inerrancy  in  the  Holy  See.  But  is  this  really  the 
case  ?  We  open  Thomas  Aquinas,  and  we  find  that 
he  relies  for  this  dogma  upon  many  other  things,  and 
especially  on  the  passages  of  Scripture  respecting 
Peter's  primacy,^^  as  well  as  upon  internal  theo- 
\  logical  grounds,  upon  inferences  from  dogmatic 
premisses,  as,  for  example,  from  the  necessary  unity 
offaith,^^ontheauthorityof  Pope  Leo  at  the  Synod  of 
Chalcedon,  attested  as  it  is  in  genuine  documents,^^ 
and  on  a  genuine  passage  of  Pope  Innocent  I., 
and  of  others.'°°  If  now,  at  a  period  in  which  the 
Latins  could  as  yet  use  but  io.^  writings  of  the 
Greek  fathers,^°^  Thomas  Aquinas  cited  passages 
from  the  pseudo-Cyrill,  and  other  false  texts  ;  so 
this  could  not,  and  cannot  even  at  the  present  day, 
damage  his  other  proofs.  Nay,  these  new  fictions 
might  have  been  abundantly  replaced  by  other 
genuine  texts.  Theodore  the  Studite,'°^  Ignatius, 
patriarch  of  Constantinople,^°^Maximus  in  a  passage 

^  On  Matt,  xvi.,  Sum.  Supplem.  q.  25,  a.  i  ;  Com.  in  h.  1.  ;  on 

ke  xxii.  2-22,  q.  I,  a.  lo;  L.  iv.  Sent.  d.  24,  q.  3,  a.  2. 

98  C.  Gent.  L.  iv.,  c.  76  ;  Quodlib.  ix.,  a.  16. 

^  De  potentia  q.  10,  a.  4,  ad  13. 

^"•^  Sum.  2.  2.  q.  11,  a.  2,  ad  3,  can.  Quoties  C.  xxiv.,  q.  i, 
Innocent  I.,  ep.  30  (see  above  cap.  vii.,  n.  38).  The  Opusculum 
contra  Grsecos  bears  the  same  relation  to  the  Summa,  as  a  treatise 
composed  in  the  Hours  of  Leisure,  to  a  great  vi^ork  carried  on  with 
predilection  for  many  years. 

1"^  Under  Eugenius  III.,  the  dogmatic  work  of  St  John  Damascene 
was  translated  into  Latin,  badly  enough,  indeed,  by  Burgundio  of 
Pisa  ;  and  in  this  form  was  known  to  St  Thomas. 

^"2  See  in  the  fourth  chapter  above  the  notes  36,  48,  and  49, 

^"2  This  Patriarch  (ep.  Ignat.  Patr.  ad  Nicol.  P.  Mansi  xvi.  47 


Roman  Forgeries.  1 7  7 

already  made  known  in  the  West  even  in  the  nintli 
century,"^'*  would  have  offered  such  a  supply.  But 
how  very  superficially  Janus  has  studied  Thomas 
Aquinas,  is  apparent  from  the  statement  of  his 
doctrine  relative  to  the  mode  of  procedure  against 
heretics.'"^      No    apocryphal   writings   were   also 

seq.^  325  seq.)  calls  the  Pope  the  physician,  whom,  by  the  words 
addressed  to  Peter  (in  Matt,  xvi.),  Christ  instituted  for  all,  without 
exception,  and  who  everywhere  heals  the  disorders  of  the  Church. 

^"*  Maximi  ep.  ad  Petr.  Illustr.  ex  Collectan.  Anastas.  Bibl. 
Combef.  ii.  76.  Migne  xci.,  144  :  "  Pyrrhus  (patriarch  of  Con- 
stantinople) must  hasten  to  give  satisfaction  to  the  Roman  Church. 
If  this  Church  be  satisfied,  he  will  then  be  called  by  all  and  every- 
where a  religious  and  orthodox  prelate.  For  he  will  speak  but  in 
vain,  if  he  does  not  have  recourse  to  the  most  blessed  Pope  of  the 
most  holy  Church  of  the  Romans,  to  that  Apostolic  see  ivhick 
received  from  the  Incarnate  Word  itself,  as  well  asfrotn  all  Councils, 
according  to  the  holy  canons  and  rules,  universal  and  supre?ne 
dominion,  authority,  and  the  power  of  binding  and  of  loosing  over 
all  the  holy  churches  of  God  upon  this  earth.  That  Word,  which 
rules  all  the  heavenly  powers,  binds  and  looses  with  this  See  in 
heaven  also.  If  he  seeks  to  pacify  others,  but  beseeches  not  the 
most  blessed  Pope  of  Rome,  he  acts  like  to  a  man  who,  accused  of 
murder  or  of  any  other  crime,  would  hasten  to  prove  his  innocence 
before  private  persons,  but  not  before  him  who,  according  to  the 
laws,  is  invested  with  judicial  powers."  This  passage  even  Pichler* 
has  acknowledged  to  be  genuine,  loc.  cit.,  vol.  ii,,  p.  602.  In  case 
a  member  of  a  German  Academy  of  Sciences  should  have  erred  in 
respect  to  the  genuineness  of  this  passage,  similar  errors  of  more 
ancient  authors,  who  possessed  not  the  present  critical  aids,  may 
well,  in  truth,  be  Atemtd  pardonable. 

^°5  Janus  writes  (p.  236,  note  2),  "  that  St  Thomas  (in  \i\5  Summa, 
1 1  q.,  art.  3,  4),  tries  to  prove  from  the  symbolic  names  given  them 
in  Scripture,  that  heretics  should  |be  put  to  death."  Thus,  e.g., 
heretics,  are  called  "  thieves  "  and  "  wolves,"  but  we  hang  thieves, 
and  kill  wolves.  Again,  he  calls  heretics  sons  of  Satan,  and  thinks 
they  should  even  on  earth  share  the  fate  of  their  father,  i.e.,  be  burnt. 
He  observes,  on  the  apostle's  saying,  that  a  heretic  is  to  be  avoided 
after  two  admonitions,  that  this  avoidance  is  best  accomplished  by 
executing  him.  For  the  relapsed  he  thinks  all  instruction  is  useless, 
and  they  should  be  at  once  burnt.  So  far  Janus.  Here  are  not 
found  the  cited  inferences  from  the  symbolic  words  of  Scripture  ; 
and  it  is  untrue  that  to  the  words  of  the  apostle  (Titus  iii.  10),  St 
Thomas  subjoins  the  remark,  that  the  avoidance  of  the  heretic  may 
^<fj/ occur  by  his  execution.  In  article  3  he  says,  "  If  the  heretic 
*  Pichler  is  a  German  schismatic— Trans. 


178  Roman  Forgeries, 

necessary  to  induce  him  to  assert  that  the  Council 
of  Chalcedon  had  conferred  on  the  Pope  the  title 
of  universal  bishop  (p.  269) ;  this  fact  was  already 
mentioned  in  the  epistles  ofGregory  the  Great  and  of 
Leo  IX.'°^  But  groundless  as  is  the  statement,  that 
theologians  before  Thomas  Aquinas  abstained  from 
all  treatment  of  the  subject  of  the  Papacy  (p.  266)/°^ 
equally  erroneous  is  it  to  say,  that  Thomas  Aquinas 
introduced  this  matter  into  his  dogmatic  system  (p. 
%6).  In  his  Summa  he  devotes  no  special  section  to 
the  Pope  ;  he  presupposes  his  authority,  and  treats 
but  occasionally  of  his  special  prerogatives. '°^ 

A  further  forgery,  Janus,  with  Launoy  and 
other  members  of  that  party,  finds  in  the  Decree 

after  being  twice  admonished  of  his  error  remains  obstinate,  so  the 
Church,  which  no  longer  entertains  any  hope  of  his  conversion,  pro- 
vides for  the  salvation  of  others,  as  by  excommunication  she 
separates  him  from  her  body,  and  delivers  him  over  to  the  secular 
tribunal  to  remove  him  by  death  from  the  world.  For,  according 
to  Jerome,  the  foul  flesh  is  to  be  cut  off,  and  a  scabby  sheep  to  be 
removed,  that  the  rest  of  the  flock  may  not  be  tainted."  In  article 
4,  the  question  is  about  those  relapsed  who  are  admitted,  indeed,  to 
penance,  but  not  so  that  they  liberentur  a  sententia  mortis,  or  as  it 
is  expressed  in  the  first  article,  Ecclesia  a  periculo  mortis  eos  non 
tuetur.  Cf.  art.  3,  possunt  non  solum  excommunicari,  sed  et  juste 
occidi.  That  they  must  be  burned,  St  Thomas  does  not  say  ;  but 
he  only  wishes  to  show  that  they  can  justly  suffer  death.  He  does 
not  declare  also  that  all  instruction  is  useless,  but  presupposes  a  case 
of  failure. 

1**^  Greg.  M.,  L.  iv.,  ep.  32,  36,  L.  vii.  30.  Leo  IX.,  ep.  ad. 
Caerul.,  c.  9,  p.  70,  ed.  Will.    Cf.  Hefele,  Cone,  ii.,  §  202,  p.  525,  seq. 

i*""  Vid.  Hugo  a  S.  Victore  (see  note  12  in  cap.  vi.  above),  Rupert 
von  Deutz  (Lib.  ii.  in  Joh.,  c.  3  in  Apoc.  Et  vidi,  sedes.  de  div. 
oflic.  ii.  22.  Cf.  Bennettis,  P.  i.,  t.  ii.,  pp.  347,  348),  Anselm  of 
Havelberg  (Dial  iii.  9,  10),  Hugo  Etherianus  (c.  Graec.  errores,  iii. 
10,  16,  17),  Peter  of  Blois  (ep.  99,  ad  Urban,  iii.,  ep.  48,  136,  145, 
146),  Peter  Lombard  (Sent.,  L.  iv.,  d.  24),  Alexander  of  Hales  (p. 
3,  q.  40,  m.  2  ;  d.  4,  q.  23,  m.  l). 

1"«  Cf.  Sum,  I,  q.  112,  a.  2,  ad.  2  (Power  of  Absolution)  ;  2,  2, 
q.  68,  a.  4,  ad.  3  (Removal  of  Infamy) ;  ibid.,  q.  89,  a.  9,  ad.  3 
(Absolution  from  an  Oath) ;  3,  q.  72,  a.  11,  ad,  I  (Delegation  of  a 
priest  with  the  power  of  confirming  after  the  example  of  Gregory  the 
Great);  supple.,  q,  25,  a,  i  (Grant  of  an  Indulgence,  &c.) 


Roman  Foj'geries.  1 79 

of  Union  sanctioned  by  the  Council  of  Flor- 
ence '°^  (p.  322).  There,  in  the  Latin  text,  in 
order  to  transform  the  restriction  of  the  Papal 
power  into  a  clause  of  confirmation,  the  particle 
"et"  was  changed  into  "  ctiam."  *  But  "et"  in 
Latin,  like  "  koX  "  in  Greek,  signifies  both  and  and 
also ;  further,  it  is  the  same  whether  I  say,  ^'  as  well 

^^  Cf.,  on  this  question,  Ballerini  de  vi  ac  ratione  Primatüs,  t.  ii., 
pp.  59-61.  Gerdil,  Animadv.  in  Com.  Febronii  posit.  II.  Opera 
xiii.,  II.  II.  Bennettis,  P.  i.,  t.  i.,  p.  486,  seq.  Beidtel's  Can.  Law, 
P-  395,  n-  f- 

*  The  undeniably  true  reading  is  that  of  '^  etiam."  This  has 
been  victoriously  proved  by  Mamachi  and  Zaccaria.  But  the  editor  of 
the  Civilta  has  found  three  codices  in  the  Vatican  library,  all  of  the 
15th  century.  Two  have  "  etiam"  in  full,  and  one  "  et  "  with  a  stroke 
of  abbreviation,  such  as  et.  In  the  Archivesof  the  Vatican  Basilica  he 
found  one  of  the  origmals  of  the  Decree  of  Union.  This  codex,  too, 
has  "  etiam  "  in  full.  It  bears  the  signatures  of  the  Pope  Eugenius 
IV.,  and  of  the  Greek  emperor,  John  Palaologus.  It  is  divided  into 
two  columns,  Greek  and  Latin.  Just  as  the  *'  etiam  "  is  to  be  read 
here,  so  is  it  also  to  be  read  in  the  other  original  exemplars  pre- 
served at  Florence,  Bologna,  and  Paris,  as  may  be  seen  in 
Schelstrate,  in  the  preface  to  his  treatise  on  the  Council  of  Con- 
stance. With  respect  to  Florence,  the  Canon  Cecconi  wrote  to 
the  editor  of  the  Civilta  Cattolica,  that,  in  the  Laurentian  Library  of 
that  city  is  preserved  the  first  and  most  precious  of  the  five  originals 
of  the  Decree  of  Union.  This  has  not  only  the  signatures  of  the 
Pope  and  of  the  Emperor,  but  those  of  all  the  Fathers,  Greek  and 
Latin,  present  at  the  Council.  Now  in  this,  the  most  authoritative 
of  all  the  originals,  the  "  Quemadmodum  etiam"  is  written  at  full 
length.  In  five  most  ancient  copies  of  the  Decrees  preserved  at 
Florence,  Canon  Cecconi  writes  that  the  "  etiam  "  is  also  found.  In 
a  few  more  recent  codices,  and  in  some  printed  copies  "  et "  is 
to  be  read  instead  of  "  etiam."  But  this  may  be  easily  accounted 
for  by  copyists  leaving  out  the  mark  of  abbreviation,  and 
writing  "et"  instead  of  ''et."  Mr  Foulkes  declares  that  in  the 
codex  in  the  British  Museum  also  "etiam"  is  to  be  read. 
The  Galilean  Mgr.  Maret  admits  that  in  the  Greek  version 
the  "/fal"  may  have  the  signification  of  "etiam,"  because  in  the 
second  member  of  the  sentence  the  particle  "  cv"  has  been  omitted. 
These  observations  have  been  abridged  from  the  translation  of  the 
article  of  the  Civilta  Cattolica,  well  executed  by  the  "  Vatican," 
and  inserted  in  the  present  number  of  the  Dublin  Review,  June 
1870,  pp.  518-20.  There  had  been  also  a  good  article  on  this  subject 
in  a  previous  number  of  the  Westminster  Gazette. — Trans. 


i8o  Roman  Forgeries, 

in  the  acts  of  CEcumenlcal  Councils,  as  in  the 
Sacred  Canons ; "  or,  **  in  the  acts  of  Councils,  and 
in  the  Sacred  Canons."  Moreover,  ancient  manu- 
scripts "°  and  witnesses  have  "  etiam,"  though 
Biondo  and  the  theologians  following  him  have 
"  et."  The  words  ''ßixta  emn  modimi  qnV — a  read- 
ing so  much  desired  by  the  Gallicans — is  nowhere 
found  ;  but  everywhere  stands  "  qiiemadmodumj* 
But  if  the  Council  had  wished  to  say,  that  the 
Primacy  was  to  be  exercised  only  in  the  way  pre- 
scribed by  Councils  and  the  Canons,  then  the 
decree  would  have  involved  a  self-contradiction. 
For  the  plenitude  of  power,  which  had  been  im- 
parted by  Christ  himself,  cannot  be  limited  by  any 
human  authority ;  it  would  then  be  no  more  the 
full  power  over  all  Christians  ;  and  if  the  Pope  has 
the  full  power  to  feed,  to  guide,  and  to  govern  the 
whole  Church,  then  he  has  the  power  over  Councils 
also,  which  form  but  the  representation  of  this 
universal  Church.  Further,  by  such  a  limitation, 
a  wide  field  would  have  been  opened  to  contro- 
versy ;  Eugenius  IV.  would  not,  too,  in  his  then 
position  have  yielded  in  this  matter  to  the  Greeks, 
any  more  than  to  the  Assembly  of  Basle.  If  even 
it  can  be  granted,  that  in  the  words  in  question  the 
Greeks  might  find  a  restriction,  it  certainly  was  not 
in  the  intentions  of  Eugenius  IV.  and  of  his 
advisers,   as    well   as   of   the   Latin    theologians, 


11"  Bennettis  {loc.  cit.,  p.  487)  enumerates  five  MSS.  Janus 
(p.  325,  note  2)  finds  all  the  copies,  except  the  British,  in  which  the 
words  touching  the  primacy  over  the  whole  Church  are  wanting, 
extremely  suspicious,  for  no  original  is  extant.  But  of  how  few 
synods  do  we  possess  still  the  original  acts  !  Janus  even  conjectures 
that  there  was  an  interpolation  in  the  Greek  text.  But  to  this  sup- 
position are  opposed  the  arguments  in  Joseph  Methon  (Migne 
clix.,  p.  1309) ;  Card,  Bessarions's  Encyclical  to  the  Greeks  {ibid., 
clxi,,  p.  465,  seq.  480),  nay,  the  Encyclical  Epistle  of  Mark  of 
Ephesus  {ibid.^  clx.,  p.  200). 


Roman  Forgeries.  i8i 

especially  Turrecrcmata,  a  leading  witness.  We 
know  not  for  certain  who  composed  the  Decree  of 
Union  ;  it  was  probably  the  Camaldulese  Abbot, 
Ambrosius  Traversari,  who,  according  to  Syropulos, 
was  best  versed  in  the  Greek  learning."' 

Of  the  preceding  transactions  we  know  the  fol- 
lowing results.  The  Greeks  had  acknowledged 
that  the  Pope  should  have  all  those  privileges 
which  he  possessed  from  the  beginning,  and  before 
the  schism.  Eugenius  IV.  demanded  a  further 
concession  that,  by  virtue  of  the  plenitude  of  his 
power,  the  Pope  had  been  able  to  annex  the  words 
''filioque"  to  the  creed.  To  this  the  Greeks  were  un- 
willing to  assent ;  several  of  the  best  Latin  theolo- 
gians illustrated  the  question  by  many  passages, 
for  the  most  part  genuine,  and  by  no  means  "  with 
a  mass  of  forged  or  corrupted  passages,  derived  from 
pseudo-Isidore  and  Gratian  "  (p.  323).  Lastly,  the 
question,  respecting  the  right  of  the  Pope  to  make 
the  addition,  was  left  untouched.  The  Greeks 
wished  to  concede  the  primacy  under  two  limita- 
tions— first,  that  without  the  emperor  and  the  patri- 
archs the  Pope  could  convoke  no  QEcumenical 
Councils  ;  but  if  they  did  not  appear,  he  could 
hold  them;  and,  secondly,  he  could  receive  no  ap- 
peals from  the  patriarchs,  nor  summon  these  before 
his  tribunal,  but,  at  most,  send  judges  into  the  pro- 
vince, and  let  the  question  be  there  decided.  Euge- 
nius with  great  decision  replied,  that  he  wished  to 
maintain,  unabridged,  all  his  privileges,  and  would 
subtract  nothing  from  them  ;  that  he  possessed  the 
full  power  to  feed  and  to  govern  the  whole  Church. 
On  the  26th  June  the  Greeks  thus  formulized  their 
views  :  "  We  confess  that  the  Pope  is  the  high- 
priest  and  supreme  governor,  vicegerent  and  vicar 

^^1  Syropul.  vera  hist.  ed.  Creyghton,  1660,  p.  81.    Hefele,  in  the 
Theological  Quarterly  Review  of  Tübingen,  p.  249,  1847. 


1 8  2  Roman  Forgeries. 

of  Christ,  shepherd  and  teacher  of  all  Christians, 
in  order  to  guide  and  to  rule  the  Church  of  God, 
without  prejudice  to  the  privileges  and  rights  of 
the  oriental  patriarchs  ;  that  the  patriarch  of  Con- 
stantinople is  the  second  after  him,  and  so  forth." 
The  Pope  now  permitted  the  draft  of  union  to  be 
drawn  up.  In  this  the  Greeks  were  displeased 
with  the  formula  of  the  introduction,  "  Eugenius, 
bishop,  and  so  forth,"  as  well  as  the  clause  that  the 
Pope  possessed  his  privileges  "  according  to  the 
determination  of  Scripture  and  the  sentences  of 
the  saints  ;"  they  wished  the  words,  "  according  to 
the  purport  of  the  canons,"  to  be  substituted. 
Cardinal  Julian  defended  the  first  form ;  the  Greeks 
at  last  conceded  that  the  Pope  possessed  his  privi- 
leges according  to  the  canons,  the  sentences  of  the 
saints,  holy  writ,  and  the  acts  of  councils.  After 
the  Greeks  in  the  clause,  ''  saving  the  rights  of  the 
oriental  patriarchs,"  had  added  the  word  "  omni- 
bus "  to  "  juribus,"  the  fathers  of  the  council,  on  the 
5th  July  1439,  subscribed  the  Decree  of  Union.'" 

As  now  in  the  words,  ''  that  to  the  Pope,  in  the 
person  of  St  Peter,  full  power  to  feed,  to  rule,  and 
to  administer  the  whole  Church  was  given  by 
Christ,"  the  reference  to  the  Scripture  texts  in 
Matthew  and  John  was  sufficiently  contained  ;  it 
was  not  especially  necessary  to  insert  the  words 
"  the  sentences  of  the  saints,"  which  had  occurred 
to  the  Greeks  as  redundant ;  and  so  the  Latin  com- 
posers of  the  decree  were  satisfied  with  the  addi- 
tional clause,  "  as  is  also  contained  in  the  acts  of 
general  councils,  and  in  the  sacred  canons."  "^  So 
did  the  Latins  understand  the  decree,  whether  they 

^12  Cf.  Natal.  Alex.  HE.  Saec.  xv.  et  xvi.  Diss,  viii.,  art.  4,  n. 
12.  Diss.  X.,  art.  2,  n.  12,  seq.  Bennettis,  loc.  cit.,  p.  281,  seq. 
Hefele,  loc.  cit.^  p.  245,  seq. 

^^^  So  Hefele  also,  loc.  cit.,  p.  254. 


Roman  Forgeries.  183 

wrote  ''et''  or  ''  etiam;''  so  did  the  united  Greeks 
also."^ 

Yet  the  Roman  forgeries  are,  for  Janus,  by  no 
means  exhausted  ;  they  go  down,  according  to 
him,  to  Bellarmine  "^  and  Baronius,  who  have  been 
hitherto  looked  on  as  princes  of  Catholic  theology 
(p.  394).  However,  I  begin  to  fear  my  readers 
will  lose  all  patience  in  following  me  through  the 
labyrinthine  paths  of  Janus,  especially  as  I  should 
have  to  speak  only  of  less  interesting  forgeries  in 
the  breviary,  in  the  martyrology,  and  the  like.  I 
shall,  therefore,  only  take  the  liberty  of  stating,  that 
it  must  appear  as  a  monstrous  assumption,  when 
our  author  asserts  that  all  those  who  still,  in  the 
sixteenth  and  seventeenth  centuries,  sought  to  de- 
fend the  spurious  Decretals,  wished  designedly  to 
promote  fraud  ;  and  that  one  of  these,  the  Jesuit 
Turrianus,  strove  to  aid  the  Roman  system  by  new 
patristic  fabrications,  as  he  appealed  to  manuscripts 
which  no  human  eye  had  ever  seen  (p.  401).  How- 
ever, if  Turrianus,  like  many  of  his  cotemporaries, 
omitted  to  cite  his  manuscripts,  so  several  of  these 
were  afterwards  discovered,  and  the  character  of 
the  much-reviled  Jesuit  was  in  several  respects 
vindicated.  To  him  we  are  indebted,  for  example, 
for  the  first  notices  upon  the  canons  of  a  so-called 
synod  of  the  Apostles  at  Antioch.  Tillemont  and 
Natalis  Alexander  believed  this  account  to  be  a 


"^  Joseph  Methon  pro  Cone.  Flor.,  P.  V.,  §  3  :  oi  5^  Ä7toi  k,  t.  X. 
"The  saints  and  the  Acts  of  CEcumenical  Councils  confirm  this  in 
the  clearest  manner,"  p.  316,  ed.  Migne. 

1^^  Bellarmine  appears  to  our  Janus  as  dishonest  (p.  394).  If  he 
sometimes  uses  pseudo-Isidore,  then  again  ventures  not  to  assert  the 
undoubted  genuineness  of  the  decretals,  and  expresses  himself  at 
different  times  in  a  vacillating  manner,  so  it  is  no  longer  possible  to 
regard  him  as  sincere.  But  how  many  scholars  have  oftener  changed 
their  views,  and  have  later  brought  forward  as  very  problematical, 
what  they  had  previously  asserted  in  an  affirmative  and  dogmatic  tone? 


1 84  Roman  Foi'geries. 

fraud ;  but  in  our  age  these  canons  were  found 
in  valuable  manuscripts  at  Munich,  Paris,  Rome, 
and  Florence  ;"^  and  herein  the  calumniated  man 
received  his  complete  justification.  The  defence 
of  the  pseudo-Areopagitic  writings,  which  the  Greek 
Fathers,  like  Maximus,  so  highly  esteemed,  can 
truly  not  be  alleged  against  the  Jesuits,  who  neither 
alone,  nor  as  a  body,  stood  up  for  their  genuine- 
ness. 

If  all  the  supposititiouswritings  and  interpolations 
of  texts  current  among  the  Greeks,  who  at  an  early 
period  were  reproached  with  a  passion  for  these 
fabrications,"^  and,  further,  if  all  the  writings  forged 
to  the  prejudice  of  the  Apostolic  See,  as,  for  -ex- 
ample, the  privilege  pretended  to  be  granted  by 
Pope  Adrian  I.  to  Charlemagne,  respecting  the 
appointment  to  bishoprics  and  to  the  See  of  Rome, 
and  which  even  Gratian  admitted  into  his  collec- 
tion,"^ as  well  as  other  false  documents  brought 
out  in  the  contest  of  investitures,"^  and  the  multi- 
tude of  spurious  papal  bulls  which  were  fabricated 
like  a  regular  manufacture,  and  provoked  special 
laws  ;"°  if  all  these  fabrications,  we  say,  and  upon 
which  alone  a  whole  book  might  be  written,  had 
been  attended  to  by  our  author,  the  chapter  on 

"^  Bickell's  "History  of  Canon  Law,"  vol.  i.,  pp.  102,  242. 
Giessen,  1843.     Pitra  op.  cit.,  t,  i.,  p.  89. 

^^^  We  might  here  remind  the  reader  of  the  false  letters  of  Pope 
Vigilius,  and  of  other  supposititious  documents  brought  forward  in 
the  sixth  council,  of  the  narrative  of  Anastasius  the  Sinaite 
(Hodeg.  c.  10,  Migne  Ixxxix.,  p.  184,  seq.),  respecting  the  forgeries 
carried  on  on  a  large  scale  in  Alexandria  after  the  death  of  Eulogius, 
of  the  words  of  Anastasius  the  librarian  (Prsef.  in  Cone.  viii.  Mansi 
xvi.,  p.  12),  as  well  as  of  the  words  of  Pope  Nicholas  I.  (ep.  9)  : 
Quonian  sicut  nonnullse  diversi  temporis  Scriptural  testantur,  fami- 
liaris  est  ista  temeritas. 

^^^C.  22,  dist.  63.  This  Gratian  admitted  ;  he  did  not  suppress 
the  passages  respecting  councils  (Dist.  18). 

1^3  Hefele,  iii.,  p.  579. 

i^y  Neander's  "  History  of  the  Church,"  ii.,  p.  442,  seq.^  3d  ed. 


Roman  Forgeries.  185 

forgeries  would  have  been  a  very  instructive  one. 
How  much  the  popes  were  sinned  against,  and 
particularly  Boniface  VIII.,  to  whom  a  false  pro- 
fession of  faith  was  ascribed  :'" — all  this  must  be 
taken  into  account  by  an  impartial  historical  in- 
quirer;  and  not  only  so,  but  the  judgments  of  all 
eminent  contemporaries,  the  ideas  ruling  each  age, 
the  state  of  general  intellectual  culture,  must  not 
be  left  out  of  consideration.  But  by  the  process 
adopted  nothing  is  gained  ;  we  must  advance  still 
much  farther.  In  order  fully  to  prove  the  theses 
set  forth,  we  must  reject  all  the  papal  briefs  from 
the  year  385  to  845,  acknowledged  as  undoubtedly 
genuine  by  Catholic  and  Protestant  historians,  even 
of  recent  times ;  nay,  we  must  subvert  all  eccle- 
siastical history,  and  make  a  tabula  rasa  of  the 
history  of  the  first  thousand  years  of  the  Church, 
and  institute  a  critical  process,  such  as  F.  Baur, 
Schwegler,  Bruno  Bauer,  and  others  have  pursued 
in  regard  to  the  primitive  and  sacred  records  of 
Christianity.  Then  when  all  testimonies  are  re- 
jected, we  can  set  forth  any  favourite  system  ;  but 
history  we  no  more  can  write.  We  can,  indeed, 
indulge  ourselves  in  fictions,  without,  however, 
being  dexterous  enough  to  fasten  upon  the  past 
forgeries,  which  were  not  long  since  proved  by 
others. 

121  Bennettis,  P.  ii.,  t.  v.,  p.  238,  seq. 


CHAPTER  IX. 

A  GLANCE   AT   COUNCILS. 

]E  advance  a  step  farther.  Presupposing 
the  justness  of  the  method  followed  by 
Janus,  and  treating  after  this  model  ex- 
tant testimonies,  we  might  completely 
annihilate  the  authority  of  Councils.  It  could  be 
shown  in  the  same  way,  that  the  records  of  anti- 
quity furnish  far  weaker  proofs  for  them  than  for  the 
Papal  supremacy.  Janus  says  indeed  (p.  421)  : 
"  It  is  commonly  taught  in  theological  manuals, 
schools,  and  systems,  that  the  Councils  of  the 
Church  are  not  only  useful,  but  even  necessary." 
This  necessity,  however,  was  never  understood  as 
an  absolute,  but  only  as  a  relative  one;'  for,  ac- 
cording to  universal  consent,  the  dispersed  Church 
with  its  Head  suffices  to  settle  and  to  decide  all 
controversies.  Janus  himself  cannot  establish  the 
absolute  necessity  of  Councils,  for,  according  to  his 
own  principles,  the  ultimate  decision  rests  in  the 
consent  of  all  the  faithful  (p.  41 1).     The  Church  in 

1  Duval  de  supr.  Rom,  Pont,  potest,  P.  Iv.,  q.  i.  Bellarmin,  de 
Cone,  i.,  10.  Kilber,  Theol.  Wirceb.,  t.  i.  Principia  Theol.  Disp. 
ii.,  c.  2,  art.  i,  p.  206.  Phillips'  Can,  Law,  ii.,  §  83,  p.  226.  Manual, 
p,  470,  seq.  Schulte,  System  of  Can.  Law,  p.  347.  Beidtel,  Can. 
Law,  p.  408,  seq.  Against  Febronius  (de  statu  Eccl.  c.  6,  7). 
Augustine  also  (ad  Bonif.,  L,  iv,,  c,  ult.)  may  be  cited.  On  the  Paris 
Faculty,  see  Bennettis,  P.  i.,  t.  ii.,  p.  677,  seq.;  680,  seq. 


A  Gla7ice  at  Councils.  187 

her  totality  is,  according  to  this  great  teacher, 
secured  against  false  doctrines.  At  the  Council 
the  bishops  attest,  each  for  the  portion  of  the 
Church  known  to  him,  that  a  special  doctrine  has 
there  been  hitherto  taught  and  believed.  Or  they 
attest,  that  in  the  doctrines  hitherto  believed,  a 
truth,  though  not  yet  expressly  formulized,  is  with 
inevitable  necessity  there  contained  as  a  logical 
consequence.  **  Thereupon,  whether  this  testimony 
hath  been  rightly  deposed,  whether  freedom  and 
truthfulness  and  impartiality  have  reigned  among 
the  bishops  of  the  synod,  thereupon  the  Church 
again,  which  adopts  or  rejects  the  council  or  its 
decree,  decides  in  the  iiltiniate  instance!'  The 
consent  of  all  believers  must  be  proved  ;  the  final 
decision  is  thus  placed  in  the  hands  of  individuals, 
or  at  least  of  the  majority.  But  why  then  as- 
semble a  Council  that  costs  so  much  time  and 
money,  as  all  entitled  to  a  vote  can  never  meet 
together  in  one  place }  Would  it  not  be  far 
better  to  vote  at  once  in  local  assemblies,  and 
to  promulgate  the  decrees  by  addresses,  which  the 
newspapers  could  give  further  publicity  to  t  And 
if  we  still  will  have  Councils,  why  not  establish 
them  in  every  parish  }  Nay,  the  bishops  are  no 
more  judges,  no  more  chief  shepherds  set  by  the 
Holy  Ghost  to  rule  the  Church  of  God,  but  merely 
deputies  to  be  judged  by  the  faithful,  and  whose 
authority  receives  its  last  sanction  from  their  sub- 
ordinates. Quite  as  well,  and  perhaps  still  better 
than  bishops,  scholars  and  particularly  professors 
and  literati,  could  meet  to  represent  their  par- 
ticular Churches,  and  furnish  a  testimony  of  their 
faith.  Nay,  public  opinion,  which  we  are  told 
gave  in  the  fifteenth  century  such  weight  and 
authority  to  the  Councils  of  Constance  and 
Basle,  as  well  as  their   lasting  influence  on  the 


1 88  A  Glance  at  Cotmcils. 

condition  of  the  Church  (p.  28),  is  decidedly  repre- 
sented to-day  by  literati,  hke  Janus,  and  by  politi- 
cal newspapers,  like  the  Allgemeine  Zeitimg  of 
Augsburg.  Should  the  Church  even  dissolve  into 
particles  and  fragments,  and  its  whole  constitution 
be  heaved  from  its  foundations,  so  much  the  better  ! 
Yet  we  overlook  all  the  contradictions  in  this 
theory.  Against  an  absolute  necessity  of  General 
Councils,  the  fact  that  in  the  first  three  centuries  of 
the  Church  none  such  were  held,  already  speaks 
decisively  ;  ^  and  certainly  an  essential  and  indis- 
pensable element  in  her  constitution  they  are  not. 
Of  the  provincial  Councils  of  that  primitive  period 
but  few  traces  have  been  preserved.  The  African 
Synods,  whereof  we  possess  the  most  knowledge, 
sanctioned,  in  reference  to  the  re-baptism  of  here- 
tics, an  erroneous  doctrine ;  and  the  first  Spanish 
Council  known  to  us,  that  of  Elvira,  inculcated  a 
harsh  rigorism.  It  was  only  after  long  and  arduous 
struggles  the  first  General  Council  of  Nicaea  ob- 
tained undisputed  recognition.  Many  anti-synods 
were  held  ;  the  imperial  terrorism  of  a  Constantius 
appeared  in  the  foreground.  St  Gregory  Nazi- 
anzen  ^  expressed  himself  very  bitterly  against  the 
synods  of  his  time,  filled  as  he  was  with  indigna- 
tion at  the  ambition  of  the  Eastern  bishops,  and 
which  afterwards  displayed  itself  in  even  more 
glaring  colours.  The  second  General  Council  was 
for  sixty  years  after  it  had  been  held,  not  yet 
generally  received  among  the  Greeks;  '^  and  among 

2  Did  Janus  forget  this,  when  (p.  421)  he  writes  that  in  former 
times  there  was  no  exaijiple  "that  three  centuries  had  passed  away 
without  an  earnest  desire  for  an  CEcumenical  Council  making  itself 
anywhere  heard  ?  "  A  desire,  however,  might  certainly  exist  with- 
out the  possibility  of  its  being  carried  into  effect  :  but  loudly  ex- 
pressed that  desire  certainly  has  not  been. 

•^  Ep.  55,  ad  Procop.  al.  130. 

^  Hefele,  Cone.  ii.  30. 


A  Glance  at  Councils.  189 

the  Westerns  still  later :  and  it  was  only  after  the 
Canons  of  Ephesus  and  Chalcedon,  its  own  were 
received  into  the  collections  of  law.^  The  authority 
of  the  Council  of  Ephesus  was  for  several  years 
disputed  in  the  Patriarchate  of  Antioch.^  The 
bishops  Eutherius  of  Tyana,  Helladius  of  Tarsus, 
and  prelates  of  other  provinces,  requested  of  Pope 
Sixtus  III.  to  undertake  a  revision  of  its  decrees, 
and  so  save  the  world,  as  Pope  Damasus  had  once 
saved  it  from  the  Apollinarian  error.^  Without 
Pope  Leo  the  Great,  the  Latrocinium  of  Ephesus, 
which  the  Emperor  Theodosius  II.  had  confirmed, 
would  have  obtained  in  the  East  undoubted 
authority ;  whereas  the  Synod  of  the  Oak  of  the 
year  403,  like  to  the  one  just  named,  was  in  fact 
crowned  with  a  success  to  which  the  innocent 
Chrysostom  fell  a  victim.  The  Synod  of  Chalcedon 
found  in  the  Patriarchates  of  Alexandria  and 
Antioch  numerous  and  decided  opponents,  led  to 
much  bloodshed,  and  presented  an  image  of 
Byzantine  ambition  at  its  close,  as  it  had  of  tumult 
and  of  licence  on  the  part  of  the  Egyptian  Prelates 
at  its  beginning.^  The  fifth  Council  would  not 
have  been  held  without  the  authority  of  the 
Emperor  Justinian  ;  it  produced  manifold  divisions 
and  new  disorders  :  those  who  had  risen  against 
Pope  Vigilius  and  his  successors  on  account  of  his 
condemnation  of  the  Three  Chapters,  rose  up  in 

5  Ballerini  de  ant.  canon,  collect.,  P.  i.,  c.  2,  n,  3. 

^  Hefele,  loc.  cit.,  p.  231,  seq. 

"^  Constant,  p.  1245,  seq.—n.  2,  p.  1246,  n.  8,  p.  1249,  n.  12,  p. 
1252  :  Sanctis  tuse  religiositatis  provolvimur  pedibus,  ut  manum 
porrigas  salutarem  et  auferas  mundi  naufragium  omnemque  horum 
inquisitionem  jubeas  fieri  et  his  illicitis  coelestem  superduci  correc- 
tionem,  n.  14,  p.  1253  :  Qusesumus  igitur,  ut  absque  dilatione 
exsurgatis  et  fervido  zelo  magnum  victoriae  trophaeum  contra 
semulorum  cuneos  erigatis,  ante  oculos  habeutes  boni  pastoris 
diligentiam  simul  et  Studium  circa  ovem,  quae  erraverat. 

8  Neander's  Church  History,  I.,  704,  709,  805,  seq.    Third  Ed. 


IQO  A  Glance  at  Councils. 

like  manner  against  this  fifth  Council.  How  many 
falsified  texts  of  the  Fathers  came  to  light  in  the 
sixth  General  Council ;  what  flattery  towards  an  un- 
worthy emperor,  what  petty  jealousy,  too,  towards 
all  non-Byzantines  was  displayed  in  the  Council  in 
Trullo,  assembled  in  the  year  692!^  What  trifling 
arguments  did  the  bishops  of  the  second  Nicene 
Council  adduce,  and  whose  decrees  Pope  Adrian  I. 
so  courageously  defended  against  the  Franks  ! 
The  objections  which  are  raised  against  this  Pope 
on  account  of  the  Synod  of  Frankfort,  the  Caroline 
Books,  and  the  Council  of  Paris,  held  in  the  year 
824  (p.  80,  81,  in  German),  fall  more  heavily  still  on 
the  seventh  General  Council,  which  the  Pontiff*  un- 
doubtedly defended  against  the  Franks,  misled  as 
they  were  by  a  very  bad  translation  of  the  Acts  ; 
while  he  still,  even  in  the  year  794,  had  sent  into 
the  East  no  formal  confirmation  ofthat  Council ;'° 
so  that  the  Studites,  who  were  strongly  attached 
to  Rome,  doubted  of  the  legitimacy  and  of  the 
oecumenical  character  of  that  Council."  If  it 
deserves  all  praise  that  Adrian  preferred  the  course 
of  calm  inquiry,  and  made  no  use  of  his  authority 
which  could  not  even  be  disputed,  we  can,  on  the 
other  hand,  scarcely  bestow  a  like  praise  on  the 
prudence  and  the  tact  of  those  Western  Synods." 
But  as  the  seventh  Council  of  jZj  set  aside  the 
Iconoclast  Synod  of  754;  so  in  the  East  itself  it  was 
again  assailed  after  815,  and  then  rejected,  and  only 
in  the  year  842  was  it  restored  to  the  honours  of 
full  recognition.  The  eighth  General  Council  of 
869,  for  a  long  time  not  accounted  one  in  the  West, 
was  in  the  East  after  ten   years  completely  set 

»  Neander's  Church  History,  I.,  722,  II.,  106,  117,  seq.,  306. 
^^  Hadrian,   I.,  ep.  ad  Carol.     Jaffe,  n.   1902  ;  Nos  adliuc  pro 
eadem  synodo  nullum  responsum  hactenus  Imperatori  reddidimus. 
^1  Theod.  Stud.,  L.  I.,  ep.  38,  p.  1044,  seq, 
12  Bennettis,  P.  I.,  t.  i.,  p.  224.  ^ 


A  Glaiicc  at  Councils.  1 9 1 

aside,  nay  anathematized ;  and  all  attempts  to 
bring  the  Greeks  back  to  its  recognition  utterly 
failed.'^ 

With  these  and  such  like  facts  it  were  easy  to 
reduce  the  importance  of  Councils  still  lower,  than 
Janus  has  done  in  regard  to  the  Papal  Primacy. 
The  first  eight  General  Councils,  all  held  in  the 
East,  stand  high  in  the  estimation  of  our  authors. 
They  fail  to  show  that  the  participation  of  the 
patriarchs  of  Alexandria,  Antioch,  and  Jerusalem, 
in  the  two  last  of  those  synods,  is  subject  to  grave 
doubt ;  ^^  and  that  their  recognition  in  the  West  is 
due  solely  and  entirely  to  the  See  of  Rome.  This 
silence  on  the  part  of  our  authors  is,  from  their 
general  tendency  of  mind,  not  to  be  wondered  at  ; 
but  it  is  a  matter  of  greater  surprise  that  these 
eight  CEcumenical  Synods  of  the  East,  including 
the  interpolated  Quinisext,  should  find  favour  in 
their  eyes,  although  they  were  not  held  according 
to  that  ideal,  which  our  doctors  regard  as  that  of  a 
Council  truly  oecumenical. 

A  sevfere  criticism  on  the  subsequent  Synods  of 
the  West,  a  malicious  satirist  could  draw  from  the 
pages  of  Janus.  For  many  centuries,  namely,  from 
the  eleventh  to  the  beginning  of  the  fifteenth 
century,  the  history  of  Councils  would  appear  in 
the  saddest  light.  ''  Not  only  were  Councils  to  be 
made  dependent  (on  the  Popes),  but  the  institution 
itself,  as  it  existed  for  900  years,  was  to  be 
abolished"  (p.  118).  **  The  Synods  of  particular 
national  churches  were  to  be  put  an  end  to"  {ibid.) 
National  Councils,  and  those  of  particular  countries, 
had  not  indeed  existed  for  900  years.  Provincial 
Synods  were  that  form  of  Councils  that  bore  most 


^3  Neander,  op.  cit.,  II.,  291,  seq.,  302,  313,  317. 
1-*  Neander  II.,  316. 


192  A  Glance  at  Councils, 

decidedly  a  legal  stamp  ;  '^  real  national  Synods 
sprang  up  much  later,  and  soon  degenerated  into 
instruments  of  political  despotism.  But  Gregory 
VII.,  we  are  told  (p.  109  German),  wished  that  only 
popes  or  their  legates  should  hold  Synods  ;  other- 
wise the  institution  should  disappear  from  the 
Church.  That  the  latter  event  lay  in  the  inten- 
tions of  the  Pope  is  in  no  way  proved  ;  the  former 
allegation  is  equally  destitute  of  proof.  If  Gregory 
wished  Synods  to  be  held  under  the  presidency  of 
his  legates,  he  was  induced  as  well  as  entitled  to 
do  so  from  the  corruption  of  many  bishops,  and 
from  the  circumstances  of  the  times. 

Of  the  General  Councils  held  in  the  West,  we  first 
meet  with  the  first  great  Lateran  Synod  of  1 123, 
which  confirmed  the  Concordat  of  Worms.  Janus 
finds  the  fact  very  significant  (p.  190),  that  twice  as 
many  abbots  as  bishops  took  part  therein.  But 
that  in  the  Council  of  J^^J,  the  Greek  Archimand- 
rites played  a  very  important  part,'^  and  later  a 
still  more  important  one,  is  a  fact  totally  disre- 
garded. Our  authors  assert  that  ''  no  contemporary 
tells  us  anything  of  this  first  General  Assembly  of 
the  West"  (p.  191):  so  not  even  Suger,  abbot  of  St 
Denis,  appears  to  be  counted  among  these  con- 
temporaries.^' It  appears  especially  revolting  to 
Janus  that  the  Pope  made  and  promulgated  the 
laws  in  his  own  name;  but  it  was  the  first  General 
Council  at  which  a  Pope  presided  in  his  own 
person ;  in  the  following  Synods  the  like  was 
observed  under  the  like  circumstances,  and  the 
Decrees  were  promulgated  by  the  Pope  with  the 
formula,  sacro  approbante  Concilio ;   and  this  was 

^5  Cone,  Nie.  i.,  c.  5  ;    Antioch.,  c.  20 ;    Trull,  c.  8  ;  Nie.  ii., 
c.  6. 
1«  Hefele,  Cone,  iii.,  428. 
17  Hefele,  v.,  339,  seq. 


A  Glance  at  Councils.  193 

partly  done,  even  at  the  Council  of  Constance.'^ 
This  formula  by  no  means  points  to  a  superiority 
of  the  Council  over  the  Pope  ;  '^  it  speaks  much 
more  for  the  reverse.'^     The  acts  of  this  Synod  we 
certainly  do  not  possess,   but    we    cannot  thence 
infer  that  no  deliberations  took    place  ;  but  thus 
much  we  see  from  the  Chronicle  of  Monte  Cassino, 
that  the  disputes  between   the   bishops  and   the 
monks  led   to  warm   discussions."     Even  of  the 
tenth  CEcumenical  Council,  held  in  the  year  1139 
under   Innocent   II.,  we  have  only  some  special 
notices  and  thirty  canons.     The  bishops,  we  arc 
told,  "  appeared  only  as  passive  witnesses  to  hear 
the  Pope's  lofty  commands  (p.  191);  nay,  the  Synod 
was  an  accomplice  in  the  error  of  the  Pope  relative 
to  Orders  (p.  300,  German).  More  serious  and  event- 
ful, according  to  Janus  (p.  191),  was  the  eleventh 
CEcumenical    Council    of    1179,    whose    twenty- 
seven  canons  are,  in  part,  of  very  high  importance  ; 
but  of  this  Council  no  deliberations  are  extant. 
The  three  sessions  occurred  between  the  5th  and 
19th    days    of    March    1179"    (not    even    "three 
weeks!")      The    decrees   were   promulgated    by 
Alexander  III.,  sacro  approbante  Concilio ;  and  that 
no  one  then  took  the  slightest  offence  therefrom, 
Janus  himself  attests.     We  now  come  to  the  fourth 
Lateran  Council  of  the  year  12 15.  **  A  free  delibe- 
ration in  the  presence  of  an  Innocent  III.  was  not 
to  be  thought  of"  (p.   192).     Important  as  are  the 
decrees  of  this  twelfth    CEcumenical   Council   in 
respect   to  dogma  and    to  discipline,^^   it   is   yet 

18  Hefele's  Cone.  I.,  p.  6i. 

19  Defensio  declarat.  Cleri.   Gall.   P.  ii.,   L.   xii.,  c.  34,   L.   ix. 
c.  31. 

-"  Bennettis,  t.  i.,  P.  i.,  p.  265,  seq^. 
»1  Hefele  V.,  p.  343,  j^^. 
22  Ibid.,  p.  632. 
^  Ibid.,^.  7^3,  seq. 

N 


1 94  A  Glance  at  Councils. 

condemned  as  quite  unfree.  "  From  the  stand- 
point of  the  Popes  of  that  time,  the  only  business 
of  bishops  at  a  Council  must  be  to  inform  the  Pope 
of  the  condition  of  their  dioceses,  to  give  him  their 
advice,  and  form  a  picturesque  background  for  the 
solemn  promulgation  of  his  decrees "  (p.  192). 
"  Innocent  had  his  Decrees  read  to  them,  and 
after  listening  in  silence,  they  were  allowed  to  give 
their  assent"  (p.  192). 

Quite  as  the  prophet  had  announced  for  1869,  so 
the  historian  recounts  for  12 15.  On  the  authority 
of  the  by  no  means  always  veracious  Matthew 
Paris,  it  is  asserted  "that  the  Pope  when  the 
bishops  wished  to  return  home  forbade  them,  until 
they  had  paid  him  large  sums  of  money,  which 
they  had  to  borrow  at  high  interest  from  the 
brokers  of  the  Papal  Court  ^'  (p.  193).  The  purpose 
for  which  the  Pope  desired  this  money  is  passed 
over  in  total  silence  ;  the  funds  were  for  a  Crusade, 
then  considered  as  the  common  concern  of  Chris- 
tendom, and  which  the  Pope  fitted  out  at  great 
personal  sacrifices.  Innocent  himself  contributed 
^30,000  to  this  expedition  ;  all  clerics  were,  for 
three  years,  to  contribute  one-twentieth  of  their 
incomes,  the  Pope  and  the  Cardinals  one-tenth.^"^ 

The  first  Council  of  Lyons,  held  in  the  year 
1245,  is  hated  on  account  of  its  decision  respecting 
the  Emperor  Frederick  II.,  and  in  the  opinion  of 
Janus,  it  is  not  oecumenical  (p.  193,  n.  2).  Pope 
Innocent  IV.,  it  is  said,  summoned  only  some 
selected  prelates  and  the  King  of  France  ; 
but  this  assertion,  indeed,  is  far  from  proved.^^ 
Supposing  that,  in  regard  to  its  convocation,  the 
Council  had  not  been  oecumenical,  it  could  still 
become  so  by  its  celebration  and  confirmation — 

24  Hefele  V.,  p.  805.  ^^  Ibid.,  p.  972. 


A  Glance  at  Coiuicils.  195 

"  celebrationc  ct  confirmatione."  That  Innocent 
avoided  calling  it  oecumenical  is  false ;  in  the 
Decrees  themselves  the  name  "  holy  and  general 
Synod"  occurs;*^  it  was  only  Frederick  II.  who 
appealed  to  a  "  Council  truly  oecumenical  \"  ^^  and 
the  Galileans  themselves  recognised  the  oecume- 
nicity  of  this  Synod/^  The  second  Council  of 
Lyons,  held  in  1274,  is  somewhat  more  leniently 
treated,  as  well  as  Pope  Gregory  also,  "  who,  in 
despite  of  his  good  will,  was  unable  to  restore  the 
old  forms  of  Councils  "  (p.  194).  The  Pope  then 
was  not  quite  so  all-powerful !  The  Council  of 
Vienne,  celebrated  about  the  year  131 1,  is  also 
declared  not  to  have  been  oecumenical ;  as  only 
bishops  chosen  out  by  Pope  Clement  V.  were 
admitted.  But  this  assertion,  even  from  the  number 
of  prelates  that  appeared,  is  quite  untrue  ;^^  and  in 
this  case,  too,  the  Pope  could  not  have  inflicted 
blame  and  punishment  on  the  bishops  who,  with- 
out any  good  grounds,  had  not  obeyed  his  sum- 
mons.^° 

As  to  what  Janus  recounts  of  the  third  and  last 
Session,  in  which  Pope  Clement  V.,  before  the  pro- 
mulgation of  the  sentence  on  the  Templars,  imposed 
complete  silence  on  the  bishops  ;  this  cannot  be 
established  after  an  accurate  statement  of  the  pro- 
ceedings.^' But  after  the  great  schism  in  the 
Papacy,  which  broke  out  in  the  year  1378,  "a 
different  spirit  and  different  principles  prevailed,  at 
the  fifteenth  century  Councils  of  Pisa,  Constance, 
and  Basle,  for  the  preponderance  of  Italian  bishops 

=6Hefele  V.,p.  966,c.  17. 
-^  Ibid.,  p.  1000. 

28  Bennettis,  P.  i.,  t.  i.,  pp.  2S5-291.     Cf.  Xat.  Alex.  Sa.'C.  xiii., 
et  xiv.     Dissert.  V. 
-^  Hefele  VI.,  p.  460,  seq. 
^^  Ihid.,x>.  487.     Cf.  I.,  p.  51,  scq. 
^^  Ibid.,  p.  463,  seq.,  especially  470,  n.  r. 


196  A  Glance  at  Councils. 

was  broken  by  new  regulations  "  (p.  197).  Here, 
indeed,  innovations  were  permitted  ;  but  they  were 
not  in  favour  of,  but  against,  the  Papacy.  The 
voting  by  nations  was  utterly  contrary  to  the  spirit 
of  the  ancient  Councils,  and  was  supported  by  no 
ecclesiastical  tradition  ;  but  the  advocates  of  the 
''primitive  episcopal  system "^^  were  pleased  with 
this  innovation  ;  all  means  they  considered  lawful 
against  the  "  gigantic  power  of  the  Papacy." 
Quite  certain  it  is  that  this  forty  years'  schism  in 
the  Popedom  shook  the  Pontifical  power,  till  then 
deemed  invincible  (p.  292)  ;  that  the  French  and 
the  Italians  were  here  engaged  in  a  struggle  for 
the  possession  of  the  supreme  ecclesiastical  dignity, 
and  that  contemporaries  wavered  about  the  ques- 
tion of  right  (p.  295) — a  question  indeed  on  which 
political  and  national  interests  exerted  a  strong 
influence.  The  struggle  of  the  Hohenstaufens 
against  the  Church  had  led  the  Popes  to  attach 
themselves  more  and  more  to  the  crown  of  France ; 
the  residence  of  the  Pontiffs  in  Avignon  essen- 
tially contributed  towards  the  subsequent  schism  ; 
and  this  schism  inflicted  very  deep  injury  on 
the  Roman  See  in  the  eyes  of  the  world,  as  well 
as  greatly  impeded  its  action.  The  election 
of  Urban  VI.  must,  especially  when  we  consider 
the  earlier  recognition  of  the  cardinals,  be 
considered  as  valid. ^^  On  examination  of  the 
question  of  right,  Clement  VII.  can  appear  only  as 
an  anti-Pope,  and  Urban's  successor,  hence  also 
Gregory  XII.  must, be  regarded  as  the  legitimate 
Pope.^'^     The  Council  of  Pisa  in   1409  but  aggra- 

22  On  the  writers  of  that  time,  vide  Bennettis,  loc.  ciL,  p.  303, 
seq. 

"3  Hefele  VI.,  p.  653,  seq. 

"*  Ballerini  de  potest.  Eccl.,  p.  135,  n.  4,  Raynaldus,  anno  1409. 
Phillips'  Can.  Law,  I-,  §  31,  p.  253. 


A  Glance  at  Councils,  197 

vatcd  the  schism  ;  its  whole  mode  of  proceeding 
was  utterly  unbecoming,^^  and  even  Janus  can  only 
boast  of  it,  that  it  was  '^  a  Synod  assembled  from 
all  Europe,  at  which  men  could  dare  to  speak 
openly  and  vote  freely "  (p.  297).  Three  Popes 
were  present  at  this  Synod — Gregory  XII.,  the 
successor  of  Urban  VI.,  Benedict  XIII.,  the  suc- 
cessor of  the  anti-Pope  Clement  VII.,  and  the 
newly-elected  Pontiff,  Alexander  V.,  who  was  soon 
succeeded  by  Balthasar  Cossa,  under  the  name  of 
John  XXIII.  The  latter  presided  at  its  com- 
mencement over  the  Council  summoned  to  Con- 
stance. After  his  flight  this  Council  issued  the 
celebrated  Decree  on  the  superiority  of  the  Council 
over  the  Pope  ;  "  a  decision,"  says  Janus,  "  more 
eventful  and  pregnant  in  future  consequences  than 
had  been  arrived  at  by  any  previous  Council,  and 
accordant  in  principle  with  primitive  antiquity — 
for  so  the  Church  held  before  the  appearance  of 
the  pseudo-Isidore  (p.  300) ; — perhaps  the  most 
extraordinary  event  in  the  whole  dogmatic  history 
of  the  Christian  Church"  (p.  302). 

But  this  Decree  never  obtained  legal  force.^^  It 
had  emanated  from  a  headless  Assembly,  which 
could  constitute  no  CEcumenical  Council,  without 
the  concurrence  of  any  one  of  the  Popes,  of  whom 
one  at  least  was  legitimate  ;  it  was  a  make-shift  in 
a  state  of  confusion,  an  arbitrary  act  of  violence. 
Never  has  it  received  any  Papal  confirmation, 
neither  from  Martin  V.  nor  from  Eugenius  IV. 
Janus  indeed  asserts  :  "an  express  confirmation  of 
this  Decree  by  Martin  V.  seemed  at  the  time  not 
only  superfluous,  but  objectionable.    It  would  have 

^•^  Ilefele  I.  52,  seq.,  VI.,  902.     Phillips,  loc.  cit.,  p.  254. 

2^  Bennettis,  P.  I.,  t.  I.,  p.  377.  Ballerini  de  pot.  Eccles.,  c.  7, 
p.  loi.  Schelstrate  de  sensu  et  auctor.  decret.  Cone.  Constant. 
Romce  1686. 


igS  A  Glance  at  Cotmcils. 

been  like  a  son  wanting  to  attest  the  genuine 
paternity  of  his  own  father,  for  this  Decree  had 
made  him  Pope.  Had  he  wished  to  assail  its 
vahdity  in  any  way,  he  would  have  been  bound  at 
once  to  resign,  and  let  the  deposed  Pope  again 
take  his  place"  (p.  305).  But  hereby  the  legitimacy 
of  the  Synod  of  Pisa,  and  of  the  Pope  elected  by  it, 
is  falsely  pre-supposed  as  undoubted.  Gregory 
XII.,  the  legitimate  Pope,  had  solemnly  abdicated 
without  confirming  that  Decree;  John  XXIII.  was 
deposed  by  the  same  authority  which  had  elevated 
him,  in  the  person  of  his  predecessor  Alexander 
v.,  and,  moreover,  he  had  completely  submitted  on 
the  26th  and  31st  May  141 5,  to  the  ordinances  of 
the  Council  of  Constance  ;  ^^  Benedict  XIII.,  con- 
fined to  a  small  obedience,  had  been  deposed  on 
the  26th  July  141 7,  and  this  deposition  was,  with 
the  exception  of  a  small  handful,  ratified  in  the 
whole  Church.  Accordingly,  the  Papal  chair  was 
vacant,  and  Martin  V.  owed  his  election,  which 
occurred  on  the  i  ith  November  1417,  by  no  means 
solely  to  "  the  new  Decree,  or  to  the  Episcopal 
system."  Martin  V.  afterwards  declared  that  he 
approved  what  had  been  decreed  "  conciliariter  in 
materiis  Fidei,  et  non  aliter,  nee  alio  modo  " — what 
had  been  decreed  "according  to  the  forms  of  a 
Council  in  matters  of  faith,  and  not  otherwise,  nor 
in  any  other  manner."  From  Pierre  D'Ailly  we 
know  ^^  that  the  Decree  in  question  had  not  been 
framed  "  conciliariter,"  because  it  was  passed  with- 
out the  concurrence  of  the  Cardinals,  and  merely 

37  Hefele  VII.,  137,  141. 

^8  Tract  de  auctorit.  Ecclesioe,  141 6,  Gerson.  opp.  II.  940  :  Qu» 
deliberatio  (quatuor  nationum),  exclusa  deliberatione  dicti  Collegii 
(Cardinalium),  et  non  facta  in  communi  sessione  collationevotorum, 
videtur  multis  non  esse  censenda  deliberatio  Concilii  generalis 
conciliariter  facta.  That  the  Cardinals  did  not  concur  in  this 
decree  is  shown  by  Bennettis,  1.  c,  p.  399. 


A  Glance  at  Coii7icils.  199 

by  a  majority  of  votes  according  to  nations/^  Still 
less  can  a  Papal  confirmation  be  deduced  from  the 
Decrees  respecting  the  heresy  of  Wickliffe  (p.  305)/"* 
On  the  other  hand,  Martin's  constitution  of  the 
loth  March  141 8,  which  forbade  an  appeal  from 
the  Apostolic  See,  completely  overthrew,  as  Gerson 
himself  very  well  saw,  these  new  fundamental 
rights/' 

At  the  Synod  of  Basle — an  Assembly,  which 
degenerated  into  a  stigmatised  Conciliabulum,  and 
brought  a  new  schism  upon  the  Church,'^^  and  of 
which  even  Janus  himself  timidly  admits,  "  that  it 
had  some  w^eak  points"  (p.  316), — the  Decrees  of 
Constance  were  renewed  with  much  ostentation, 
but  with  equal  ill  success.  The  recognition  of 
Eugenius  IV.  was  conditional;  the  clause  ''without 
prejudice  to  the  right,  the  dignity,  and  the  pre- 
eminence of  the  Apostolic  See,^'  is  here  decisive;'*^ 
and,  moreover,  the  definition  of  the  Council  of 
Florence  on  the  Primacy  is  utterly  opposed  to 
those  Decrees.     The  assertion,  therefore,  is  com- 

29  Schwab  Gerson,  p.  514,  515.  Hefele  VII.,  104.  Phillips' 
Can.  Law,  p.  257,  iv.,  §  194,  p.  438,  seq. 

^  Bennettis,  P.  I.,  t.  I.,  p.  373,  seq. 

^1  Dialog,  apolog.  ii.  390.     Schwab.,  loc.  cit.,  p,  665,  666, 

^^  The  philologer  Poggio  calls  the  Assembly  of  Basle  the  begin- 
ning of  all  the  evils  and  schisms  which  we  have  seen  arise  in  the 
Church  of  God.  (Or  in  fun.  Cesarini,  Card.  Mai  Spicil.  X.,  I., 
p.  378).  Cf.  Pogg.  epist.,  ep.  28,  38,  ib.,  ep.  34,  ed.  Paris. 
Augustin.  Patric.  Summa.  Concil.  Basil.,  c.  145  (Hard.  IX., 
1 196). 

*3  Bennettis,  loc.  cit.,  p.  403,  454,  seq.  Phillips  IV.,  §  195,  p.  455, 
§  196,  p.  458.  That  the  Bull  "Tanto  nos  pacem,"  issued  by  Nicholas 
from  a  love  of  peace,  was  a  triumph  of  the  principle  of  the  superi- 
ority of  General  Councils  to  the  Pope  (as  asserted  by  Janus,  pp.  338, 
339,)  is  utterly  untinie.  The  abrogation  of  the  decrees  agamst  the 
Assembly  of  Basle  is  nothing  less  than  an  approval  of  the  decrees 
framed  by  it  ;  it  is  simply  in  regard  to  the  parties  interested,  a 
bringing  back  to  the  status  quo  ante.  Cf.  Bennettis,  pp.  445,  474, 
seq.y  and  upon  the  general  question  llefele  I.,  p.  54,  vii.,  p. 
372. 


200  A  Glance  at  Coicncils. 

pletely  groundless ;  "  that  the  foundation  of  the 
Decrees  of  Basle,  the  dogmatic  decisions  on  the 
Pope's  inferiority  to  a  Council  remained  untouched" 
(p.  339)  ;  ''  and  that  Thomas  de  Vio  or  Cajetan  it 
was  \v\io,  for  the  fii^st  tunc,  got  the  authority  of  the 
decisions  of  Constance  and  of  Basle  on  the  rigrhts 
of  Councils,  which  had  been  so  solemnly  acknow- 
ledged and  attested  by  former  Popes,  to  be  assailed 
by  Leo  X.  "  (p.  374).  Has  Janus,  then,  never  heard 
anything  of  the  constitutions  of  Pope  Pius  IL, 
dated  respectively  the  i8th  January  1459,  and  the 
26th  April  1463,  as  well  as  that  of  Julius  II.  in 
1509  ?  ^''  Antoninus,  Archbishop  of  Florence,  and 
Cardinal  Turrecremata,  still  energetically  defended 
the  old  Papal  system  ;^^  while  the  adherents  of  the 
new  episcopal  system,  who  had  acted  too  precipi- 
tately, were  in  many  ways  undeceived.  To  what,  in 
fact,  did  the  new  maxims  lead  ?  Some  they  brought 
to  despair  of  the  Church  herself,  so  that  Peter 
d'Ailly  and  Jean  Courteouisse  went  to  such  lengths 
as  to  call  in  question  the  infallibility  of  General 
Councils  in  matters  of  faith  ;  ^^  and  others  again 
they  brought  round  to  a  reconciliation  with  the 
Holy  See.  This  was  the  case  with  Cardinal 
Julian  Cesarini,  the  former  president  of  the  Coun- 
cil of  Basle,  with  ^neas  Sylvius  Piccolomini, 
afterwards     Pope     Pius     11.,"^^    with    Nicholas    of 

^*  Const.  Exsecrabilis  and  In  minoribus  agentes.  Bull  Rom.  ed. 
nov.  Taurin.,  t.  V.,  pp.  149,  150,  173-180.  Const.  Julii  IL,  zA,  p. 
479-481. 

^5  S.  Antonin.  Sum.,  p.  3,  L.  XXIII.,  c.  3,  §  3,  Job.  de  Turre- 
cremata  de  Eccl.  ii.  93.  Likewise  Thomas  Waldensis  Doctrin.  fidei, 
L.  ii.,  art.  3,  c.  32,  Job.  Ferrariens.  Lib.  c.  gent.,  c.  79. 

^0  Mansi  XXVIL  547.     Schwab.,  loc.cit.,  p.  500,  747. 

^^  .^neas  Sylvius  as  Pope  cites  the  words  of  Cesarini,  which 
made  so  deep  an  impression  on  him  :  "  I  have  returned  to  the 
sheepfold,  who  had  so  long  wandered  outside  of  it ;  I  have  heard 
the  voice  of  the  shepherd  Eugenius  ;  and  if  thou  art  rational,  do  thou 
the  like." — (Bull  of  Retractation,  §  5.) 


A  Glance  at  Co2incils.  201 

Cusa/^  with  Francis  Zabarclla,  who  had  formerly 
advocated, though  not  in  an  unquahfied  manner,  the 
superiority  of  the  Council  over  the  Pope,  and  who 
at  Constance  had  approximated  more  to  the  Papal 
system,  and  afterwards  became  one  of  its  most 
ardent  defenders/^  Janus  indeed  thinks  (p.  412), 
'*that  a  great  community  has  no  temptation  to 
establish  some  particular  subjective  view  or  opinion 
of  its  own."  But  the  history  of  the  Council  of 
Basle  shows  the  contrary.^" 

Martin  V.,  feeling  himself  bound,  as  well  by  his 
promise  as  by  the  decree  "  Frequens"  of  the  Coun- 
cil of  Constance,  accepted  by  him,  summoned  a 
Council  first  to  Pavia  and  then  to  Sienna  (p.  309). 
The  participation  of  bishops  was  really,  and  not 
in  pretence,  a  very  small  one  ;  and  even  at  Basle, 
that  participation  was,  in  respect  to  the  prelates, 
very  insignificant.  The  scholars  and  writers  there 
assembled  looked  only  to  the  humiliation  of  the 
Pope  ;  so  that,  even  in  Italy,  they  excited  troubles 
against  the  pacific  Eugenius  IV.,  and  sought  to 
withdraw  from  him  all  pecuniary  resources.  The 
conditions  stipulated  in  1433  by  Eugenius  IV.,  and 
wdiich  Janus  (p.  313,  scq^  passes  over,  had  re- 
mained unfulfilled  ;  his  pliancy  was  met  with  only 
a  greater  spirit  of  defiance.  The  Council  of 
Basle  withdrew  from  the  Pontiff  the  Annats,^' 
and  afterwards  adjudged  them  to  the  anti-Pope, 
Felix  V.  Even  the  union  with  the  Greeks  was 
threatened  with  failure  from  the  obstinacy  of  the 
Assembly  of  Basle.     The  deposition  of  Eugenius 

•*8  Cf.  Dr  Dux's  "  Life  of  Nicholas  of  Cusa,"  vol.  i.,  p.  i66,  seq, 
Scharpff,  vol.  iL,  p.  io8. 

«  Bennettis,  P.  I.,  t.  I.,  pp.  355,  379,  S^S-  .. 

'°  Döllinger's  "  Manual  of  Church  History,"  ii.,  pp.  355-383. 

5^  Hereupon  Phillips  (in  his  Can.  Law,  vol.  v.,  §  237,  23S,  p.  567, 
.f^^.)  gives  some  excellent  explanations,  which  may  in  many  ways 
serve  for  a  rectification  of  the  assertions  of  Janus. 


202  A  Glance  at  Coimcils. 

IV.,  and  the  elevation  of  an  anti-Pope,  even  Janus 
is  obliged  to  call  an  act  of  frightful  disorder  and 
arrogance  ;  the  number  of  the  members  of  the 
Council  had  melted  down  considerably,  and  there 
remained  at  last  but  a  mass  composed  of  impure 
and  unauthorized  elements  (p.  318). 

The  Council  of  Florence,^"  consisting  almost 
entirely  of  Italian  bishops,  finds  with  our  author 
little  favour.^^  Nearly  more  dignified  and  im- 
portant appears  the  French  Assembly  of  Bourges, 
which  assembled  in  1438,  and  undertook  the  ''first 
comprehensive  codification  of  what  have  since  been 
called  the  Galilean  Liberties"  (p.  328) ;  while  poor 
Germany,  even  before  the  lapse  of  nine  years,  re- 
turned to  the  obedience  of  Eugenius  (p.  331.) 

The  fifth  Lateran  CounciP"^  is  in  the  eyes  of  our 
author  an  abomination.  It  is  called  (p.  349)  a 
hole-and-corner  Council  of  sixty-five  Italians,  as  in 
the  fifth  Article  it  had  been  formerly  nicknamed  an 
Italian  pocket  Council. ^^  ''That  such  an  assem- 
blage is  no  representation  of  the  whole  Church,  that 
it  sounds  like  a  mockery  to  put  it  on  a  par  with  the 
Synods  of  Nicaea,  Chalcedon,  and  Constantinople, 
is  evident  to  the  blindest  eye,"  (p.  197).  Still  the 
Decrees  promulgated  by  the  Pope  were  by  no 
means  unimportant. 

"  Leo  the  Tenth's  Bull,  'Pastor  ^ternus,'^^  enun- 


^2  Cf.  Bennettis,  loc.  cit.,  p.  477,  seq. ;  Phillips'  Can.  Law,  iii., 
§  137,  P-  390  ;  iv.,  §  196,  p.  457- 

^"*  Still  here  "the  forms  of  the  ancient  Councils  and  free  discus- 
sion had  to  be  allowed  on  account  of  the  Greeks,  and  the  mere 
dictation  and  promulgation  of  decrees  previously  prepared  in  the 
Papal  Cieria  had  to  be  abandoned." — (Janus,  p.  197.) 

^^  Bennettis,  /oc.  cit.,  p.  494,  seq.  Schmalzgi-ueber,  Jus.  eccl. 
Diss,  procem.,  §  8,  n.  341.     Phillips  iv.,  §  196,  p.  463. 

^'  At  p.  197  of  Janus,  there  were  only  53  bishops. 

^^  Const.  20,  also  Lib.  vii.,  Decret.  c.  3,  iii.  7,  19th  Dec. 
1516. 


A  Glance  at  Coimcils.  203 

dated  the  full  authority  and  unHmited  power  of 
the  Pope  over  all  Councils,  and  proved  this  by 
fabricated,  distorted,  or  insignificant  facts  and 
testimonies.  It  was  a  long  deduction,  in  which 
every  statement  would  be  a  lie,  if  the  compiler 
could  be  credited  with  any  knowledge  of  Church 
History.^'  It  closes  with  the  renewal  of  Boniface 
VIII.'s  Bull,  ''  Unam  Sanctam,"  (p.  198). 

A  great  stumbling-block  has  this  Bull  of  Boni- 
face VIII.  been  from  of  old.^^  Herein  ''  he  gave  a 
dogmatic  and  biblical  foundation  to  the  doctrine 
of  the  universality  of  Papal  dominion,  and  con- 
demned the  independence  of  the  civil  power  in  its 
own  sphere  as  Manicheism"  (p.  162).  But,  firstly, 
in  dogmatic  Bulls,  it  is  not  the  premisses  and  the 
ulterior  arguments,  but  solely  what  is  proposed  as 
the  object  of  faith,  which  serves  as  a  standard. ^^ 
Boniface  VIII.  here  only  defines,  it  is  necessary  to 
salvation,  that  every  man  should  submit  to  the 
Roman  Pontiff  ;^°  and  this  is  a  necessary  conse- 

°7  Whoever  reads  these  words  is  tempted  to  believe  that  Leo  X, 
cited  otily  forged  documents  ;  but  he  cites  the  words  of  Pope 
Damasus  on  the  rejection  of  the  Synod  of  Rimini  (see  above  c.  vii., 
n.  71),  the  requests  for  confirmation  made  by  the  fourth  and  sixth 
General  Councils  {ibid,  n.  67,  68) ;  he  appeals  to  the  letters  of  Pope 
Leo  the  Great  to  the  bishops  of  Sicily  (ep.  16,  c.  7,  p.  724,  ed. 
Bailer. ),  where,  among  other  things,  it  is  said  :  cum  coram  Beatis- 
simo  Apostolo  Petro  id  semper  in  commune  tractandum  sit,  ut 
omnia  ipsius  constituta  canonumque  decreta  apud  omnes  Domini 
sacerdotes  inviolata  permaneaut.  He  appeals  to  the  veneration 
manifested  by  the  eighth  General  Council  towards  Pope  Adrian 
IL,  where  we  have  the  testimony  in  the  21st  canon,  according  to 
the  Latins,  and  the  14th,  according  to  the  Greeks  (Mansi  xvi., 
174,  403),  as  well  as  in  the  request  for  confirmation  addressed  to 
the  Pope  {ibid,  pp.  202,  413.) 

58  C.  I.  de  M.  et  O.  J.  8  in.  Extravagg,  com.  Raynakl,  a.  1302. 
n.  13.  seq. 

5"  Bianchi,  op,  cit.,  t.  ii..  L.  vi.,  §  7,  n.  7,  p.  518,  seq.  Gosselin, 
op.  cit.  ii.,  p.  265,  293,  seq.  Edition  of  Münster,  Beidtel's  Canon 
Law,  p.  368,  note 

^•^  Porro  subesse  Romano  Pontifici  omnem  humanam  creaturam, 


204  A  Glance  at  Councils. 

quence  of  the  dogma  of  the  Papal  Supremacy, 
and  is  acknowledged  by  the  Galileans  themselves 
as  perfectly  true.^'  Secondly,  it  is  not  the  asser- 
tion, that  the  secular  power  is  independent  of  the 
spiritual  in  its  own  sphere,  and,  consequently,  in 
temporals,  against  which  the  Bull  protests  ;  but  it  is 
the  assertion  of  its  absolute  independence  in  regard 
to  ecclesiastical  authority,  even  in  those  cases 
where  there  is  a  question  of  sin,  and  where  the 
salvation  of  souls  and  church  property  are  in  ques- 
tion, that  the  Pope  here  condemns.^"  This  is 
shown  not  merely  by  the  other  declarations  of  the 
Pope  and  of  the  Cardinals,^^  but  by  the  purport  of 
the  Bull  itself,  drawn,  for  the  most  part,  from  the 
writings  of  the  most  eminent  theologians.  The 
special  occasion  of  this  Bull  was  the  conduct 
pursued  by  Philip  the  Fair,  who,  even  in  spiritual 
matters,  refused  submission  to  the  Pontiff,  and 
prevented  the  French  bishops  from  practising  their 
obedience  ;  but  the  Bull  meant  also  to  show,  in 
general  terms,  and  without  special  reference  to 
France,  that  the  temporal  power  of  Christian  princes 
does  not  exempt  them  from  obedience  to  the  Head 
of  the  Church.^4  xhe  train  of  thought  is  as  fol- 
lows : — The  Church  of  God  is  essentially  one,  a 
mystical  body.   This  body  has  but  one  head,  and  not 

declaramus,  diciraus,  definimus  et  pronuntiamus  omnino  esse  de 
necessitate  salutis  (according  to  Thorn.  Aqu.  opusc.  c.  Graec.) 

^^  Defensio  declar.  Cleri  Gall,  t.  i.,  P.  ii.,  L.  vii.  (al.  iii.),  c.  24, 
p.  290,  where  it  is  said  Boniface,  by  general  expressions,  has  seemed 
to  prepare  the  way  for  the  assertion  that  every  species  of  power  is 
subject  to  the  Papal,  even  in  secular  things.  Yet  he  has  restricted 
the  proposition  to  submission  in  general,  quod  verissimum  est.,  si 
de  spirituali  potestate  intelligatur. 

^^  Bianchi,  loc.  cit.,  p.  519.  Walter's  Can.  Law,  §  45,  n,  12. 
Phillips'  Can.  Law,  iii.,  §  130,  p.  256. 

^^  To  this  Fenelon  also  refers  in  his  work,  de  Summi  Pontificis 
auctorit,  c.  27,  t.  ii.,  p.  333,  ed.  Versailles. 

^*  Bianchi,  loc.  cit.,  pp.  519,  520. 


A  Glance  at  Co2incils.  205 

two,  like  a  monster.  Tliis  Mead  is  Christ,  and  His 
vicar  ;  Peter  and  his  successors.  All  the  sheep  of 
the  Lord,  Peter  must  feed  ;  he  who  separates  him- 
self from  his  obedience  belongs  not  to  the  fold  of 
Christ.*"^  There  exists  now  in  the  Church  (con- 
sidered as  the  sum-total  of  clergy  and  laity — and 
consequently  in  Christendom),  two  powers  ;  the 
spiritual  and  the  temporal,  prefigured  by  the  two 
swords  of  Peter.  The  material  sword  is  drawn /"d^r 
the  Church,  the  spiritual  ^j/the  Church  ;  the  former 
by  the  hand  of  the  king,  the  latter  by  the  hand  of 
the  priest ;  the  material  sword  must  co-operate  with 
the  spiritual  and  assist  it.  So  had  already  spoken 
St  Bernard,  so  the  Emperor  Frederic  IL,  and  many 
others  :^^  and  that  the  secular  power  should  be 
guided  by  the  spiritual  as  the  higher,  was  an  old 
Christian  idea.^^  In  so  far  now  as  both  powers  are 
in  the  Church,  they  both  have  the  same  object. 
But  as  both  are  established  by  God,  and  God  has 
ordained  all  things  well,  so  between  the  two  autho- 
rities there  must  be  a  well-defined  subordination 
of  rank — one  sword  set  under  the  other.  As  now 
the  spiritual  has  the  pre-eminence  overthe  material, 
so  the  temporal  power  is  subordinated  to  the  eccle- 
siastical, as  to  the  higher.  Hence  the  inference 
deduced  by  Hugo  of  St  Victor,^^  that  the  temporal 

*^  S.  Bernard,  de  consid.  ii.  8. 

^  Bern.  1.  c.  iv.  3  ep.  256.  Frider  ii.  Const.  1220,  c.  7.  Cf, 
the  "Saxon  Mirror,"  vol.  i.,  art.  I.  The  "  Suabian  Alirror," 
Pref.  21,  seq.  Joh.  Saresb.  Polycr,  iv.  3.  Hildeb.  Cenom.  ep.  ii.  18. 
Petr.  Dam.  ep.  vi.  4.  Gerhoch  Reich,  de  corrupt©,  eccl.  statu,  c.  3. 
Innoc.  Ill,     (Janus,  p.  171.) 

•"^  Testament  xii.  Patriarch.  Test.  iv.  Jud.  c.  21  (Cf.  "  Neander's 
Church  History,"  i.  201.)  Constit.  Apost.  ii.  34.  Chrys.  horn.  15 
in  1  Cor.  :  horn.  34  in  Hebr.,  n.  I.  Isidor.  Peius  L.  in.  ep.  244. 
Naz.,  Or  17,  p.  217  ed.  Bill.  Stephan,  vi.  ep.  ad  Basil,  Imp. 
(Mansi  xvi.  421).  Ivo  Carnot,  ep.  51,  ad  Henric,  Anglise  Reg. 
Hugo  a  S.  Victore  de  sacram  fid.  L.  ii.,  P.  ii.,  c.  4.  Alex.  Halens, 
p.  3,  q.  10  membr.  2,  S.  Thorn,  sum.  2,  2,  q.,  60,  a.  6,  ad.  3. 


2o6  A  Gla7ice  at  Councils. 

power,  If  it  is  not  good,  is  judged  by  the  spiritual, 
and  that  to  ecclesiastical  authority  the  words  of 
the  prophet  Jeremiah  apply :  "  Lo  !  I  have  set 
thee  this  day  over  the  nations  and  over  kingdoms, 
to  root  up  and  to  pull  down,  and  to  waste,  and  to 
destroy,  and  to  build,  and  to  plant"^^  (i.  lO.)  But 
these  words  excite  great  indignation  in  the  mind 
of  our  Janus,  who  says:  "■  If  Jeremiah  designates, 
after  the  oriental  fashion,  his  prophetic  office,  and 
his  calling  to  announce  the  Divine  judgments,  as  a 
commission  to  destroy  and  to  lay  waste  ;  so,  accord- 
ing to  the  Papal  interpretation,  the  Pope  must  be 
thereby  meant,  to  whom  God  has  imparted  the 
power  to  root  up  and  to  pull  down  what  and  whom 
hewill"  (p.  379,  German).  But  such  an  interpretation 
Boniface  VIII.  was  not  the  first  to  give  :  we  find 
it  already  in  Hugo  of  St  Victor,  in  St  Bernard,  in 
Peter  of  Blois,  in  Peter  the  Venerable  of  Cluny,  in 
Innocent  III.  ;^°  nay,  already  in  the  ninth  century, 
in  Pope  John  VIII. ^'  It  is  not  even  the  Popes  who 
were  the  first  authors  of  this  interpretation.  To 
the  ecclesiastical  power  in  general  the  words  were 
applied  by  the  Council  of  Meaux,  in  845,''^  by 
Theodotus  of  Ancyra  at  the  Council  of  Ephesus,^^ 
as  well  as  by  the  Byzantine  Synod,  under  Mennas, 
in  the  year  536.^-^  About  the  year  512,  the  Eastern 
bishops  addressed  Pope  Symmachus  as  follows  : — 
"  Hasten  to  make  us  free ;  for  not  merely  for  bind- 

^  This  passage  was  used  later  by  Pope  Pius  V. ;  Const.  Romanus 
Pontifex,  1569;  Regnans,  1570, 

'  ''^  Hugo,  1.  c,  S.  Bernard,  de  consid.  L.  iv.  3,  ep.  237.  Petrus 
Bles.  ep.  144,  ad  Coelestin  HI.  Petrus  Venerab.  L.  iii.  ep.  24,  ad 
Eugen.  III.  Innoc.  III.  c.  3,  de  M.  et  O.  I.  33  ;  c.  Novit.  13  eod. 
Serm.  I.  in  consecr.  sui  Pontif. 

71  Job.  VIII.  epp.  ad  Basil.  Imp.  Baron,  anno  878,  n.  iii.  ;   a. 
879,  n.  26. 

"-  Cone.  Meldens.  in  Praefat.     Hard.  IV.,  I478. 

"^  Cone.  Ephes.  431,  P.  iv.     Hard.  I.,  1666. 

^•*  Cone.  Cpl.  536,  act.  4.     Hard.  IL,  1260. 


A  Glance  at  Cotnicils.  207 

ing  was  the  power  given  unto  thee,  but  also  for 
loosing  those  a  long  time  bound  ;  not  merely  for 
plucking  up  and  destroying,  but  also  for  planting 
and  building,  according  to  holy  Jeremiah,  or  rather 
according  to  the  Redeemer  of  the  world,  Christ, 
whose  type  the  former  was."  ^^  The  "  rooting  out 
and  the  planting"  of  Jeremiah  was  usually  placed 
in  juxtaposition  with  the  "  binding  and  the  loosing'' 
of  Peter ;  as  in  the  epistle  which  John  of  Jerusalem 
addressed  in  518  to  John  II.,  patriarch  of  Con- 
stantinople/^  As  little  novel  are  the  words  of 
Boniface,  when  he  thus  continues :  ^^  "  If  now  the 
temporal  power  goes  astray,  it  is  judged  by  the 
spiritual ;  but  if  a  subordinate  ecclesiastical  autho- 
rity transgresses,  it  is  judged  by  the  one  set  over 
it  ;  but  the  supreme  ecclesiastical  power  can  be 
judged,  not  by  men,  but  by  God  alone,  according 
to  the  words  of  the  apostle,  'the  spiritual  man 
judges  all  things  ;  he  himself  is  judged  by  no  one ' " 
(i  Cor.  ii.  15).  No  new  doctrine  is  it,  again,  when 
it  is  further  said,  the  ecclesiastical  authority,  though 
imparted  to  a  man,  and  exercised  by  a  man,  is 
still  divine,  given  by  a  divine  sentence  to  Peter, 
and  to  his  successors.  As  now  Boniface,  at  the 
commencement  of  the  Bull,  laid  down,  as  the  con- 
dition of  salvation,  that  man  should  belong  to  the 
one  Church  founded  by  God;  so  he  enunciates  the 
maxim  also  that,  for  obtaining  eternal  happiness, 
each  one  is  required  to  submit  to  the  Pope.  By- 
way of  comparison,  he  points  to  the  Manichean 
heresy,  which  teaches  the  two  principles  of  things ; 
and,  in  fact,  if  the  divine  law  did  not  subject  kings,  in 
respect  of  their  sins,  to  the  Papal  authority,  so  their 

"5  Ep.  orient,  ap.  Baron,  a.  512,  n.  50. 

76  Hard.  II.,  1343. 

77  On  the  words,  "  terrenam  potestatem  instituere  habet,"  vide 
Bianchi.  1.  c,  pp.  522,  523.  Instituere  is  here  not  to  institute^  but  to 
instruct. 


2o8  A  Glance  at  Councils, 

power  must  needs  then  be  based  on  a  principle  sepa- 
rate from  the  Church;  in  which  case  they,  as  sove- 
reigns, would  stand  completely  outside  its  pale7^ 
Moreover,  many  find  this  Bull  quite  in  harmony 
with  the  epistle  of  Gregory  IX.,  dated  23d  October 
1236,  and  show  that  even  secular  princes  and 
statesmen  have  asserted  and  acknowledged,  in  the 
strongest  language,  the  supremacy  of  the  Pope, 
even  in  temporal  things/^  The  ''astonishment 
and  the  mockery  "  of  the  French  jurists  and  theo- 
logians, to  which  Janus  alludes  (p.  162),  are  in  the 
then  circumstances  of  France  under  Philip  the  Fair, 
and  from  the  shameful  policy  pursued  towards  the 
Pope,  which  recoiled  from  no  misrepresentation  and 
no  forgery,^°  easily  explained. 

But  what  Boniface  VIII.  here  defined — namely, 
the  necessity  of  obedience  to  the  Pope — is  a  prin- 
ciple of  primitive  Christianity,  and  which  Paschal 
II.  (as  we  are  told  at  p.  245)  was  certainly  not  the 
first  to  enunciate,  which  in  nowise  needed  the 
pseudo-Ambrose,  since  the  words  of  the  genuine 
Ambrose  sufficed  :  *'  Ubi  Petrus,  ibi  Ecclesia ; " 
"  Where  is  Peter,  there  is  the  Church/'  The  sepa- 
ration from  this  Apostolic  See,  and  the  arrogant 
revolt  against  it,  at  all  times  passed  as  a  separation 
from  the  Church,  as  a  going  out  of  the  kingdom  of 
the  Lord.«^ 

Pope  Symmachus  wrote  to  the  Emperor  Anas- 

^^  Phillips,  loc.  cit.,  pp.  205,  206. 

^^  Hefele,  Cone,  vi.,  pp.  317,  318.  Here  the  declaration  of  the 
Flemish  envoys,  of  the  29th  December  1299,  is  cited.  Let  us  con- 
sider, too,  what  Peter  of  Blois,  as  vice-chancellor,  wrote,  in  the 
name  of  Queen  Eleanora  of  England  to  Pope  Celestine  III,,  on 
the  occasion  of  the  imprisonment  of  her  son  Richai'd,  by  Leopold 
of  Austria,  ep.  145,  in  Baron,  anno  1 193  :  "Nonne  Petro  Apostolo 
et  in  eo  vobis  a  Deo  omne  regnum  omnisque  potestas  committitur  ? 
Non  rex,  non  Imperator  aut  dux  a  jugo  vestrse  Jurisdictionis 
eximitur. " 

^•^  Döllinger,  "  Manual  of  Church  History,"  ii.,  p.  240,  seq. 

^^  Bonifac.   I.   ep.   14,   n.   i,   p.    1037,  ed.  Coust.   a  qua  (Sede 


A  Glajice  at  Councils.  209 

tasius  :  "  Thinkest  thou,  because  thou  art  emperor, 
that  thou  canst  dare  to  despise  the  judgment  of 
God  ?  ...  or  because  thou  art  emperor,  dost  thou 
rise  against  the  power  of  Peter  }  .  .  .  But  let  us 
compare  the  dignity  of  the  emperor  with  the  dignity 
of  the  high-priest ;  between  the  two  there  exists  as 
wide  a  difference  as  between  an  administrator  of 
human  and  an  administrator  of  divine  concerns. 
Thou,  O  Emperor,  receivest  from  the  priest  bap- 
tism, the  sacraments;  thou  desirest  of  him  prayer, 
thou  hopest  from  him  a  blessing,  thou  beseechest 
him  for  pardon  in  the  sacrament  of  penance;  in 
short,  thou  administerest  human  things,  and  he 
administereth  divine.  .  .  .  Perhaps  thou  wilt  say, 
it  stands  written,  'We  must  be  subject  to  every 
power'  (Rom.  xiii.  i).  We  recognize  human  autho- 
rities in  their  proper  place,  till  they  lift  up  their  will 
against  God.  Moreover,  if  every  power  is  of  God, 
so  before  all,  and  in  a  higher  degree,  is  that  power  of 
God,  which  is  set  over  divine  things.  Honour  God 
in  us,  and  we  will  honour  God  in  thee.  But  if  thou 
honourest  not  God,  so  thou  canst  not  avail  thyself  of 
the  privilege  of  Him,  whose  rights  thou  despisest."  ^"^ 

Apostolica)  se  quisquis  abscidit,  fit  christiance  religionis  extorris, 
ep.  15,  n.  4,  p.  1041  :  In  cujus  contumeliam  quisquis  insurgit, 
habitalor  Coelestium  non  poterit  esse  regnorum.  Tibi,  inquit,  dabo 
claves  regni  coelorum,  in  qiics  Nullus  sine  gratia  Janitoris  intrabit. 
Had  Janus  read  this,  he  certainly  would  have  dated  the  "obscu- 
ration of  the  Church"  from  the  Popes  of  the  fifth  century;  or  he 
would  have  found  the  fundamental  thought  of  this  passage  in  the 
pseudo-Isidorian  epistle  of  Julius  I.  (c.  xi.,  p,  464  H.),  on  which 
Gregory  VII.  built  his  plan  of  dominion  (p.  105  Janus).  Peter 
Damiani  also  had  written  to  the  Anti-Pope  Honorius  (in  ep.  20) : 
*.'  Si  eos  sacri  canones  haereticos  notant,  qui  cum  Romana  ecclesia 
non  concordant,  qua  tu  judicaberis  dignus  esse  sententia?"  And 
to  the  clergy  and  people  of  Milan  he  wrote  (opusc.  v.)  :  "Quae 
provincia  per  omnia  regna  terrarum  ab  ejus  ditione  extranea  re- 
peritur,  cujus  arbitrio  ipsum  quoque  Coelum  ligatur  et  solvitur?" 

^2  Symmach,  Apol.  ad.  AnasL  Labbe  IV.,  1298.     Cf.  Defens. 
Decl.,  L.  ii.,  c.  7. 

O 


2 1  o  A  Glance  at  Councils. 

Let  us  now  return  to  Pope  Leo  X.  Supposing 
that  all  the  historical  arguments  in  the  Bull 
*'  Pastor  ^ternus "  were  alike  untenable,  will, 
therefore,  the  theological  ones  be  thereby  over- 
thrown, which  show  that  the  head  of  the  whole 
Church  is  the  head  of  its  representatives  also  ? 
From  the  dogmatic  definition  of  Florence,  further 
consequences  could  be  deduced.  The  reasoning 
might  be  incorrect,  but  still  the  enunciated  doc- 
trine is  not  therefore  untrue.  To  attend  the 
Council  was  open  to  all  bishops  ;  the  Popes  gave 
themselves  the  greatest  trouble  in  order  to  promote 
their  attendance  ;  all  were  summoned  ;  and  the 
Council  was  presided  over  by  no  "  Papa  dubius  " — 
no  doubtful  pope,  but  by  a  pontiff  undoubtedly 
legitimated^  There  is  scarcely  a  theological  pro- 
position upon  which  there  is  such  great  unanimity, 
as  upon  the  necessary  concurrence  of  the  Pope  to 
a  General  Council ;  but  not  less  decided  is  the 
opinion  of  the  majority  of  theologians,  that  a 
Council  without  the  Pope  is  not  oecumenical,  nay, 
can  even  err  in  matters  of  faith.^"^ 

But  once  again  "  Councils  were  perverted  into 
mere  tools  of  Papal  domination,  and  reduced  to  a 
condition  of  undignified  servitude"  (p,  190).  So 
even  the  Council  of  Trent  was  not  free  (p.  368),  and 
this  at  a  time  when  all  had  placed  their  confidence 
in  a  "  Council  truly  free,  unoppressed  by  Papal 
coercion  "  (p.  369).  "  The  Italian  bishops  at  Trent 
were  no  more  than  a  herd  of  slavish  sycophants  of 
Rome,  acting  simply  at  the  beck  of  the  legates  " 
(p.    367).^^     The    Pope   should,    indeed,   have  re- 

83  Bennettis,  P.  II.,  t.  iii.,  p.  196. 

^^  Melchior  Canus  de  loc.  theol.,  v.  4  ;  Thomassin.  Diss.,  vi.  et 
xiv.  in  concil.  Cabassut.  in  not.  Cone.  Trid.,  n.  95.  Bennettis, 
loc  ciL,  p.  185,  seq.     Phillips'  Can.  Law,  IL,  §88,  pp.  312,  313. 

8^  On  the   contrary,  the  Avenir  Catholiqiie  (N.  2,  p.  19,   n.  ir. 


A  Glance  at  Coiincils. 


I  I 


nouncccrall  his  ri^^hts  ;  then  the  Council  would  have 
been  "  free  ; "  but  a  legitimate  Council  it  would 
have  ceased  to  be.  Whatever  of  rational  freedom 
could  be  desired,  was  abundantly  secured  ;  but 
without  order,  without  the  higher  jurisdiction  of 
the  presiding  legates,  a  chaos  would  have  sprung 
up,  which  would  have  only  filled  the  Catholic 
world  with  scandal,  and  the  adversaries  with  mali- 
cious scorn.  We  do  not  deny  that  the  Council  of 
Trent,  which  undeniably  achieved  much  good,^^  did 
not  produce  all  the  fruits  which  it  might  have 
brought  forth.  But  who  is  to  bear  the  blame  of 
all  this  }  Is  it  to  the  Roman  See  solely  and  en- 
tirely, or  even  chiefly,  that  blame  attaches  }  This 
Janus  seems  to  believe.  Of  the  obstacles  opposed 
to  reform  by  many  powerful  sovereigns,  of  the  negli- 
gence of  the  ecclesiastical  princes,  and  of  the  noble 
chapters  of  Germany,  of  the  intermission  of  pro- 
vincial and  diocesan  Synods,  of  the  non-fulfilment 

Pie  IV,,  et  le  Concile  de  Trente)  endeavours  to  show  that  Pius  IV. 
left  full  liberty  to  the  Council  of  Trent.  Kut  between  the  oppres- 
sion of  the  bishops  by  the  Pope  on  the  one  hand — and  the  abandon- 
ment of  Papal  prerogatives  on  the  other,  whose  diminution  would 
have  rather  promoted  the  growth  of  heresies  than  have  checked 
them  (CC  the  document  in  Raynaldus,  anno  1563,  n.  67),  lies  a 
middle  course,  which  the  parties  concerned  did  not  fail  to  pursue. 
Here,  also,  holds  good  the  ancient  saying,  "Nihil  est,  quin  male 
narrando  possit  depravarier  "  (Terent.  in  Phomi.  iv.  4).  This  holds 
good,  too,  of  the  narration  of  that  storm  which  a  bishop  of  Cadiz 
excited  in  the  Council  of  Trent  (p.  368,  Janus),  and  which  is  told 
quite  after  the  manner  of  Sarpi.  But  it  was  the  Papal  le^^ates  who 
caused  the  prelate  to  continue  his  interrupted  discourse,  and  who 
afterwards  appeased  the  excited  Spaniards.  Vide  Pallavicini,  op. 
cii.,  L.  xix.,  c.  5,  n.  5  ;  c.  7,  n.  i.  In  the  same  way  the  conduct 
of  the  CardinalJof  Lorraine  (Janus,  p.  276)  is  quite  incorrectly  repre- 
sented. Upon  him  Pallav.,  loc.  cit.,c.  6,  n.  i,  seq.  ;  c.  7,  n.  3  ;  c.  8, 
n.  5,  6  ;  c.  16,  n.  6,  seq.  ;  L.  xxi.  c.  5,  n.  4  ;  c.  6,  n.  20,  21  ;  c.  13, 
n.  5,  Ixxiv.,  c.  2,  n.  I.  Raynald,  a.  1563,  n.  4,  5, p.  99.  Launuy 
Reg.  Navarr.  Gymnas,  p.  I.,  c.  6. 

^  Cf.  Hefele,  Theological  Quartei'ly  Rruir^o  of  Tübingen,  1846, 
p.  3,  seq.^  "On  the  Destinies  of  the  Church  since  the  Council  of 
Trent." 


2  12'         A  Glance  at  Couricils. 

of  many  of  the  most  salutary  regulations,  of  the 
ascendancy  obtained  by  the  principle  of  Terri- 
torialism,  and  of  many  other  like  things,  Janus  has 
not  a  word  to  say.  He  knows  only  how  to  speak 
of  the  experiences  (p.  419)  which  the  non-Italian 
bishops  must  have  made  at  Trent,  of  the  prohibi- 
tion to  write  commentaries  on  the  decrees  of  the 
Council,  and  of  the  interpretation  of  those  decrees 
reserved  to  the  Apostolic  See.  And  yet  it  is  pre- 
cisely the  "  Congregation  of  the  Council "  which 
has  rendered  the  most  indisputable  and  the  most 
eminent  services  to  the  progress  of  canon  law. 

But  the  soil  already  trembles  under  our  feet. 
The  last  CEcumenical  Council  of  Trent,  which 
forms  the  most  important  source  of  the  new  eccle- 
siastical jurisprudence,  was  not  free,  and  an  un-free 
Council  is  invalid,  null,  or  at  least  non-obligatory 
(p.  425)  ;  although  the  whole  Church  has  received 
it,^^  it  still  is  not  binding.  Of  all  General  Councils 
there  seem  to  remain,  then,  only  the  first  eight,  as 
well  as  those  of  Constance  and  Basle ;  so  we  have 
no  legal  foundation  more. 

And,  moreover,  we  have  no  longer  any  hope,  for 
a  free  Council  is  no  longer  to  be  expected.  "  The 
chief  reason,"  we  are  told,  "  why  nobody  since  the 
Synod  of  Trent  any  longer  desired  a  Council,  lay 
in  the  conviction,  that  if  it  met,  the  first  and  most 
essential  condition,  freedom  of  deliberation  and 
voting  would   be  wanting"  (p.  421).^^     "Nay,  in 

^  Bennettis,  p.  i.,  t.  i.,  pp.  529-532. 

^8  What  Pallavicini  {op.  cit.,  L,  xvi.,  c  lo,  n.  9,  10)  has  written 
upon  the  difficulties  of  holding  again  a  General  Council,  from  the 
impression  of  the  many  obstacles  offered  by  the  diverging  interests 
of  different  nationalities,  and  by  the  secular  courts,  as  well  as  with 
reference  to  the  dangers  so  easily  menacing  ecclesiastical  unity,  and 
also  with  reference  to  those  data  in  which  he  concurs  with  Sarpi — 
all  this  is  adduced  by  Janus  (p.  421)  as  an  expression  of  the  general 
sentiment,  *'  that  Councils  as  little  fitted  into  a  Church  constituted 


A  Glance  at  Councils.  2  1 3 

the  countries  subjected  to  the  Inquisition,  the 
mere  wish  for  another  Council  would  have  been 
declared  penal,  and  would  have  exposed  to  danger 
those  who  uttered  it"  (p.  420).  This  wish  was 
doubtless  culpable,  where  it  coincided  with  an  ap- 
peal to  a  future  General  Council,  forbidden  as  such 
appeals  were  by  canon  law,  or  when  it  proceeded 
from  hypotheses  menacing  to  the  peace,  the  dignity, 
and  the  unity  of  the  Church,  where,  as  in  the  case  of 
the  French  Appellants  of  the  last  century,  it  served 
as  a  pretext  for  schismatical  and  heretical  aims. 
]3ut,  we  are  told,  bishops  are  not  free,  they  are 
bound  to  the  Pope  by  an  oath  (p.  445,  German),  and 
by  a  real  vassal  oath  (p.  169).  Precisely  so  spoke 
the  German  Protestants,  when  Invited  on  the  28th 
April  1545,  and  24th  January  1552,  to  take  part 
in  the  Council  of  Trent.^^  And  yet  St  Boniface 
had  bound  himself  to  the  Pope  by  an  oath,^°  and 
yet  this  is  an  usage  dating  from  many  centuries, 
and  required  by  the  need  of  unity.  Does  this  oath 
hinder  episcopal  frankness  "^  does  it  prevent  the 
bishop  from  speaking  according  to  the  dictates  of 
his  conscience  ?  When  the  newly  -  consecrated 
bishop  swears  to  respect,  to  defend,  and  to  pro- 
mote the  rights  and  privileges  of  the  Apostolic 
See  ;  so  he  swears  in  the  same  formula  also  to 
observe  the  rules  of  the  Holy  Fathers.  The  one 
clause  does  not,  in  the  sense  of  the  Church,  subvert 
the  other.  The  well-being  of  religion  and  of  the 
Church  constitutes  for  the  bishop  the  supreme  rule 
of  all  his  efforts  and  actions;  and  it  is  by  no  means 
merely  for  the  advantage  of  the  Curia  this  form  of 
oath  provides.^^ 

into  an  absolute  Papal  monarchy,  as  the  States-General  fitted  into 
the  monarchy  of  Louis  XIV." 

8^  Raynald,  a.  1545,  n.  20;   a.  1552,  n.  1 1,  seq. 

s°  Othlon,  Vita  Bonifac,  L.  i.  144.  Bonif.,  ep.  1 18.  Serrar,,  ep. 
2,  ed.  W. 

"^  The  oath  of  bishops  since  the  time  of  Gregory  VII.  has  been 


2  14  ^  Glance  at  Cotmdls. 

But  what,  then,  constitutes  the  necessary  free- 
dom of  bishops  ?  Let  us  hear  on  this  subject  the 
old  master,  Febronius.^""  He  requires  that  the  Pope 
or  his  legates  should  exercise  no  preponderat- 
ing influence  over  the  deliberations  of  the  Council, 
should  not  forbid  the  bringing  forward  of  certain 
matters  for  discussion,  should  make  use  of  no 
threats  or  promises,  and  should  not  hold  the 
Council  in  any  place  unfavourable  to  the  freedom 
of  deliberation.  If,  now,  such  claims  were  regarded 
as  conditions  necessary  to  the  legitimacy  of  a 
Synod ;  so  from  this  synodical  freedom  new  diffi- 
culties only  would  spring  up,  and  various  doubts  as 
to  the  real  legitimacy  of  the  Council  would  be 
fostered. ^^  Surely  with  the  right  of  convocation, 
the  Pope  has  the  right  of  presidency  and  of  the 
initiative  in  a  Council  ;^'^  even  in  the  summons  he 
can  determine  the  subjects  for  discussion  ;  he 
ceases  not  in  the  least  degree,  when  he  enters  into 
deliberation  with  his  brethren,  to  be  the  head  of 
the  entire  Church,  as  well  as  of  individual  local 
Churches.^^  To  use  menaces  or  promises  were 
unworthy  of  the  Pope;  and  the  employment  of 
such  means  at  the  present  day  is  not  conceivable. 
But  from  the  very  fact  that  the  Pope  assembles 
the  bishops  around  him,  in  order  to  deliberate  with 
them,  it  follows,  of  course,  that  he  will  not  fetter 
their  free  expression  of  opinion.  To  the  bringing 
forward  certain  special  matters  such  little  hind- 
rance is  opposed  that,  on  the  contrary,  even  before 

copiously  treated  of  by  Bianclii  {op.  cit.,  t.  i.,  L.  ii.,  §  12,  n.  2,  3,  p. 
330,  seq.),  and  by  Bennettis,  ii.,  t.  iv.,  p.  351,  seq. 

^^  De  Statu  Eccl,,  c.  9,  §  3. 

^^  Cf.  Beidtel,  loc.cit.,  p.  403. 

^^  Ferraris  Prompta  Bibl.  V.  Concilium,  art.  I,  n,  45-49.  On  the 
formula  "  proponentibuslegatis  "  in  the  Council  of  Trent,  see  Palla- 
vic,  p.  141  ;  L.  XX.,  c.  8,  n.  2  ;  c.  15,  n.  7,  seq.  Raynald,  a.  1563, 
n.  66,  87,  190,  202. 

^^  Zaccaria  Antifebron,  Vindic.  I.,  p.  363,  j^^. 


A  Glance  at  Councils.  2  1 5 

the  gathering  of  the  Council,  an  opportunity  is 
offered  for  such  proposals.  Janus  says,  indeed, 
"  from  Gregory  the  Seventh's  time,  the  weight  of 
Papal  power  has  pressed  Uvi  times  more  heavily 
upon  Councils  than  ever  did  the  imperial  autho- 
rity" (p.  425).  But  never  was  a  Synod  reduced  to 
such  a  position  by  the  Papal  power,  as  the  third 
General  Council  was  by  the  Emperor  Theodosius 
II.  ;^^  and  at  Trent  episcopal  freedom  was  far 
more  menaced  by  the  secular  courts,  than  by  the 
Roman  Curia?'^  But  when,  in  the  sixteenth  century, 
the  demand  was  made,  "first,  that  the  proposed 
Council  should  not  be  held  in  Rome,  or  even  in 
Italy,  and,  secondly,  that  the  bishops  should  be 
absolved  from  their  oath  of  obedience"  (p.  425)  ; 
the  demand  was  by  no  means  founded  in  right. 
Compliance  with  the  latter  postulate  would  have 
violated  the  constitution  of  the  Church,  and  de- 
stroyed all  hierarchical  order  ;  the  granting  of  the 
former  might,  indeed,  have  been  attended  with 
advantages,  but  been  productive  of  disadvantages 
also,  especially  as  Germany  and  France  were  then 
jealous  of  each  other,  were  threatened  with  war, 
and  were  involved  in  the  most  fearful  religious 
contests.  Moreover,  in  despite  of  the  proximity 
of  the  city  of  Trent  to  Germany,  but  very  few 
bishops  of  that  country  appeared  at  the  Council. 

Freedom,  in  the  true  Christian  sense,  is  not  the 
removal  of  existing  limitations — not  the  arbitrary 
will  of  noisy  demagogues — not  the  domination  of 
Liberal  theorists — not  the  faculty  of  doing  every- 
thing ad  libitum.  Ethical  freedom  is  the  voluntary 
self-devotion  to  truth  and  to  righteousness — to 
the  kingdom  of  God.     And  in  this  self-devotion 

9«  Hefele,  Cone.  IL,  201. 

^  Vid.  Pallavic,  op.  cit.,  L.  xxiv.,  c.  14. 


2i6  A  Gla7ice  at  Councils. 

Pope  and  bishops  can  concur  ;  they  can,  if  they 
have  any  conception,  however  small,  of  their  task, 
co-operate  in  their  endeavours.  And  in  despite  of 
all  human  infirmities,  the  Spirit  of  God  breathes 
over  the  general  assembly  of  His  Church  ;  and 
"  where  is  the  Spirit  of  God,  there  is  freedom^ 


CHAPTER    X. 


THE    POPEDOM   IN   HISTORY. 


iiVERY  one  who  examines  the  internal 
relations  of  Church  history,  will  be  con- 
strained to  acknowledge  that,  since  the 
eleventh  century,  there  has  been  no 
period  of  it  on  which  a  CJiristian  student  can  dwell 
with  tmviixcd  satisfaction ;  and  as  he  endeavours 
to  get  at  the  bottom  of  the  causes  underlying 
that  timnistakable  decay  of  Chnrch  life,  constantly 
getting  a  deeper  hold,  and  more  widely  spreading, 
he  will  always  be  brought  back  to  the  distortion 
and  transformation  of  the  Primacy,  as  the  nltimaie 
root  of  the  evil!'  So  speaks  Janus  (Pref.,  p.  xviii.) 
But  with  nnviixcd  satisfaction  we  can  dwell  on 
no  previous  period  of  Church  history.  Everywhere, 
with  the  great  and  the  lofty  mingles  human  base- 
ness and  viciousness  ;  even  in  the  apostolic  age,  we 
meet  at  Corinth  and  elsewhere  with  great  imper- 
fections, failings,  and  vices.  Our  satisfaction  is 
everywhere  but  a  relative  one,  never  unqualified, 
never  untroubled.  But  some  subjects  of  satisfac- 
tion we  find  in  all  ages,  and  on  which  the  eye  can 
rest  with  pleasure. 

But  why  should  these  afflicting  phenomena  meet 
us  only  from  the  eleventh  century  t  Why  not,  in 
conformity  with  the  former  teaching  of  Janus,  from 


2 1 8  The  Popedom  in  History. 

the  year  845  ?  Why  not  from  the  tenth  century, 
which  exhibited  so  many  deplorable  spectacles? 
Why  precisely  from  the  eleventh  age?  In  the 
second  half  of  that  century,  we  thought  that  it  was 
the  reform  of  the  clergy,  instituted  by  the  Popes, 
which  raised  ecclesiastical  life  from  the  deep 
decay  into  which  it  had  sunk,  and  enabled  it  to 
put  forth  its  energy  in  the  Crusades,  and  in  so 
many  new  creations.  "  The  corruption  of  the 
Church,"  says  Neander,  "which  the  general  se- 
cularization of  society  threatened,  had  reached 
its  culminant  point,  and  thereby  a  reformatory 
reaction  on  the  part  of  the  Church  had  been 
called  forth.  But  under  given  conditions,  this  re- 
action could  proceed  only  from  the  Theocratic  point 
of  view,  as  those  who  displayed  the  greatest  zeal 
against  the  abuses  that  had  crept  in,  were  ruled  by 
that  set  of  principles.  Gregory  VII.  was  animated 
by  something  higher  than  by  self-seeking  and  sel- 
fish ambition  ;  it  was  an  idea  which  swayed  him, 
and  to  which  he  sacrificed  all  other  interests.  It 
was  the  idea  of  the  independence  of  the  Church, 
and  of  a  tribunal  to  exercise  judgment  over  all 
other  human  relations  ;  the  idea  of  a  religious  and 
ethical  sovereignty  over  the  world  to  be  exercised 
by  the  Papacy."'  In  favour  of  this  great  Pope, 
other  Protestant  inquirers  also  bear  testimony 
that  he  was  free  from  idle  ambition  and  base  pas- 
sions.2  But  Janus,  who  calls  him  one  of  the 
boldest  Popes,  a  man  ''whom  Nicholas  I.  only 
approaches"  (p.  102),  who  precipitated  Italy  and 
Germany  into  a  religious  and  civil  war,   charges 

J^  Neander's  "Church  History,"  ii.  p.  375,  third  edition. 

-  Luden's  "History  of  the  Gennan  People,"  vol.  viii.  pp.  468- 
471-  Leo's  "  Universal  History,"  ii.  125.  Cf.  Rühs's  "Manual  of 
the  History  of  the  Middle  Ages,"  vol.  ii.  p.  367,  and  the  works 
of  Voigt  and  Gfrorer  (German). 


The  Popedom  in  History.  2 1 9 

him  with  unhmitcd  creduhty,  and  **  with  an  eager 
desire  for  territory  and  dominion"  (p.  141).  The 
Popes  of  the  Middle  Age  carried  on  a  great 
struggle  for  the  freedom  and  independence  of  the 
Church  ;^  and  herein  all  who  have  a  heart  for  this 
great  idea  admire  them,  as  those,  on  the  other 
hand,  who  are  incapable  of  such  feelings  hold 
them  in  detestation.  There,  where  others  see  how 
the  faithful,  anxious  for  the  purity  and  the  freedom 
of  their  Church,  all  the  better  men  of  those  times, 
firmly  rallied  around  the  Papal  chair,  and  sup- 
ported the  Pontiffs  in  their  contests  against  the 
sale  of  ecclesiastical  benefices,  against  clerical  con- 
cubinage, against  violence  and  licentiousness  ; — 
there  Janus,  entirely  absorbed  in  his  own  fictions, 
sees  "  but  a  large  and  powerful  party,  stronger 
than  that  which,  two  hundred  years  before,  had 
undertaken  to  carry  through  the  Isidorian  forgery, 
and  had  been  labouring  with  all  its  might  to  weld 
the  states  of  Europe  into  a  theocratic  priest-king- 
dom, with  the  Pope  as  its  head"  (p.  loi).  Of  a 
real  reform  of  the  Church  by  Gregory  VII.  he 
finds  no  trace.  Hitherto  we  had  thought  that,  in 
the  thirteenth  century,  ecclesiastical  life,  through 
the  great  religious  orders  of  St  Dominic  and  St 
Francis,  fostered,  as  they  had  been,  by  the  protec- 
tion of  the  Popes,  received  a  new  energy,  which 
displayed  its  glorious  fruits  in  religious  missions, 
in  science,  in  art,  in  so  many  lovable  saints.  But 
these  orders,  we  are  now  told,  were  quite  in  the 
service  of  the  Curia  ;  their  members  were  Papal- 
Court  theologians,  authors  of  new  forgeries  (p.  263), 
the  strongest  props  and  pillars  of  the  Pontifical 
monarchy  (p.  152)  :  all  that  they  otherwise  did  is 
obscured  by  "the  distortion  and  disfigurement"  of 

^  Pichler,  loc.  cit. ,  i.  pp.  32,  49,  sty. 


2  20  The  Popedom  in  History. 

the  Primacy.  This  is  the  black  spot  which  Janus 
everywhere  sees.  We  would  almost  believe  that 
he  labours  under  the  jaundice. 

To  many,  even  non-Catholic  scholars,  it  has 
appeared  that  the  great  power  of  the  Popes  worked, 
on  the  whole,  advantageously,  especially  as  regards 
the  education  of  the  nations  of  Europe,  and  that 
that  power  was,  in  the  design  of  divine  Providence, 
a  necessary  step  to  a  higher  civilization.  Let  us 
hear,  for  example,  the  historian  Staudlin.  "  The 
Papacy,"  says  he,  "was  productive  of  many  bene- 
ficial effects.  Faith  in  a  living  vicegerent  of  Jesus, 
in  a  supreme  lawgiver  of  Christians,  in  a  judge  on 
the  faith  and  morals  of  the  Christian  world,  in  a 
subordination  of  secular  interests  to  spiritual — 
this  faith  was  to  countless  souls  useful  and  advan- 
tageous, and  promoted  a  reverence  for  Christianity. 
The  Papacy  united  in  one  common  bond  the  dif- 
ferent European  nations,  furthered  their  mutual 
intercourse,  and  became  a  channel  for  the  commu- 
nication of  the  sciences  and  arts  ;  and  without  it 
the  fine  arts,  doubtless,  would  not  have  attained  to 
so  high  a  degree  of  perfection.  The  Papal  power 
restrained  political  despotism,  and  from  the  rude 
multitude  kept  off  many  of  the  vices  of  bar- 
barism."'^ Let  us  now  turn  to  the  French  his- 
torian Michaud.  *'  The  genius  of  the  Popes,"  says 
he,  "  has  been  the  subject  of  very  great  praise ; 
this  praise  was  accorded  chiefly  with  the  view  to 
bring  into  greater  prominence  their  ambition. 
But  if  the  Popes  possessed  the  genius  and  the 
ambition  ascribed  to  them,  so  we  must  believe 
that  from  their  very  origin  they  were  engaged  in 
the  aggrandisement  of  their  states,  or  with  the 
growth  of  their  temporal  power ;  but  herein  they 

^  "Universal  History  of  Christianity,"  p.  223.     Planover,  1806. 


The  Popedojn  in  History.  2  2  i 

were  not  successful,  or  did  not  attempt  the  execu- 
tion of  such  plans.  Is  it  not  more  natural  to  think 
that,  in  all  their  great  achievements,  the  Popes  but 
followed  the  spirit  of  Christendom  ?  In  the  Middle 
Age,  which  was  the  period  of  their  greatest  power, 
they  were  themselves  rather  more  guided  by  its 
spirit,  than  they  themselves  guided  it.  Their  so- 
vereign power  was  the  result  of  their  position,  and 
not  of  their  will.  .  .  .  As  the  nations  formed  no 
other  idea  of  civilization  than  that  which  they  had 
received  from  the  Christian  religion,  so  the  Popes 
were  quite  naturally  the  supreme  arbiters  among 
peoples.  In  the  midst  of  the  darkness,  which  the 
light  of  the  Gospel  incessantly  strove  to  disperse, 
their  authority  must  have  passed  as  the  first  and 
the  highest.  The  temporal  power  needed  their 
sanction,  kings  and  nations  besought  their  aid,  and 
asked  counsel  of  them,  and  the  Popes  therefore 
held  themselves  authorized  to  exercise  a  general  (?) 
dictatorship.  This  dictatorship  was  often  exer- 
cised in  behalf  of  public  morality  and  of  social 
order ;  it  often  protected  the  weak  against  the 
strong  ;  it  checked  the  execution  of  criminal  de- 
signs ;  it  restored  peace  among  states ;  and  pre- 
served an  infant  society  from  the  wild  excesses  of 
ambition,  of  licentiousness,  and  of  barbarism/'  ^ 

Raoul  Rochette  observes :  "  During  the  long 
duration  of  the  Middle  Ages,  the  influence  of  the 
Popes  was  in  general  more  advantageous  than 
pernicious  to  Europe  ;  and  if  we  weigh  all  things 
in  an  accurate  scale,  we  shall  find  that  society  was 
indebted  to  the  Papal  power  for  more  virtues  and 
more  blessings,  than  for  any  evils  and  mischief 
which  that  power  might  have  inflicted.  But  in 
order  to   render  this   assertion    more   feasible  to 

*  "  Ilistoire  des  Croisades,"  4  ed,  t.  iv,,  p.  97,  t.  vi.,  p.  230,  sc-'/. 


2  2  2  The  Popedom  in  History. 

those  who  labour  under  the  strongest  prejudices, 
I  must  add  that  it  is  precisely  such  a  state  of 
civilization,  or,  if  we  will,  of  barbarism,  as  existed 
in  the  Middle  Age,  which  was  necessary  to  make 
the  authority  of  the  Popes  attended  with  such 
favourable  results."  ^ 

"  Whatever  judgment  we  may  form,"  says  Leo- 
pold Ranke,  "  of  the  Popes  of  an  earlier  period, 
they  had  ever  great  interests  at  heart — the  foster- 
ing of  an  oppressed  religion,  the  struggle  with  hea- 
thenism, the  propagation  of  Christianity  among 
the  northern  nations,  the  foundation  of  an  inde- 
pendent hierarchical  power ; — these  efforts  (and  it 
belongs  to  the  dignity  of  human  nature  to  will  and 
to  execute  great  things),  these  efforts  stamped  on 
the  actions  of  the  Popes  a  lofty  character."  ^ 

Such  testimonies  and  judgments  we  might  con- 
siderably augment*  ^  But  suffice  it  to  ask,  Where 
is  there  in  the  world's  history  a  like  institution, 
which  (to  consider  it  only  in  the  light  of  human 
wisdom  and  policy^)  so  gloriously  unites  and 
reconciles  classic  antiquity  and  modern  times, 
which  has  exercised  its  spiritual  supremacy  under 
the  most  various  relations,  which  defended  it 
where  it  was  contested,  and  won  it  back  again 
where  it  was  almost  lost }     Where  is  there  another 

^  "  Discours  sur  les  heureux  effets  de  la  puissance  Pontificale  au 
Moyen  Age,"  p.  lo.     Paris,  i8i8. 

''  "  The  Roman  Popes  in  the  Sixteenth  and  Seventeenth  Centu- 
ries," vol.  i.,  p.  43.     Germ.  ed. 

*  See  Appendix,  containing  testimonies  of  German  Protestant  his- 
torians to  the  great  moral  and  social  services  of  the  Papacy. — Trans. 

**  Cf.  John  von  Müller  on  the  League  of  the  German  Princes 
(Works,  ix.,  p.  164).  Hurter  Innocent  III.,  in  many  passages,  espe- 
cially vol,  i,,  pp.  99-166,  ii.,  p.  712.  Ancillon  Tableau  des  Revolu- 
tions du  Systeme  Politique  del' Europe,  t.  i.,  Introduction,  pp.  133- 
157.     Coquerel  Essai  sur  I'Histoire  du  Christianisme,  p.  75, 

^  Cf.  the  English  Historian  Macaulay  in  his  Critique  of  Ranke's 
"  History  of  the  Popes,"  Edinbwgh  Revieiv,  1840. 


The  Popedom  in  History,  223 

institution  which,  in  the  worst  times,  standing  up 
in  opposition  to  the  mightiest  rulers,  and  regard- 
less of  all  external  considerations,  has  protected 
with  such  energy  and  dignity  the  sanctity  of  the 
nuptial  tie,  the  rights  of  the  defenceless,  the  purity 
of  morals,  and  which  has  with  so  much  tact  and 
moderation  influenced  the  progressive  march  of 
human  society  ?  And  this,  indeed,  in  a  way  that 
subsequently  even  non-Catholics  could  express 
the  wish  to  see  erected  anew  in  Rome,  under 
the  presidency  of  the  Pope,  a  supreme  tribunal 
for  the  settlement  of  disputes  among  princes  ? '° 
Where  is  there  an  institution  which  hath  so  vic- 
toriously surmounted  the  most  violent  assaults 
from  every  quarter,  which  hath  so  conquered  the 
"  gates  of  hell,"  which  hath  so  victoriously  with- 
stood all  who  have  predicted  its  downfall,  and 
have,  instead  thereof,  incurred  their  own  destruc- 
tion, whether  they  inscribed  on  their  banner  state- 
omnipotence,  or  the  sovereignty  of  the  people,  or 
free  science  ? 

And  what  have  we  to  bring  against  this  institu- 
tion ?  It  was  "  forged  documents"  that  raised  it  to 
its  height.  As  if  a  piece  of  paper  or  parchment, 
especially  in  times  when  most  people  were  unable 
to  read,  when  the  sword  was  in  higher  estimation 
than  the  pen,  would  have  been  able  to  erect  a 
despotism,  to  which  all  bowed !  "  It  was  the 
tyranny  of  the  Popes,  the  subjugation  of  their 
fellow-bishops,  that  brought  it  about."  As  if  all 
bishops    had    been    servile,    cowardly,    imbecile 

'^^  Leibnitz  Tract,  de  Jure  Suprematiis,  P.  iii.,  opp.  iv.  330.  Lettre 
2,  ä  ^L  Grimaret.  So  again,  in  our  times,  David  Urquhart  has  pub- 
lished a  pamphlet,  that  has  appeared  in  French,  entitled,  "  Appel 
d'un  Protestant  au  Pape  pour  le  retablissement  du  droit  Public 
des  Nations.  Cinq  Propositions  sur  Toeuvre  du  futur  Concile  CEcu- 
menique."     Paris  :  Douniol,  1869. 


2  24  The  Popedom  in  History. 

betrayers,  of  their  own  and  of  the  Church's  rights, 
who  let  the  yoke  be  laid  on  their  necks,  and  became 
mere  functionaries  of  the  Popes ;  and  at  a  time, 
too,  when  the  dukes  of  the  several  races  raised 
themselves  from  the  condition  of  officials,  to  the 
rank  of  sovereigns,  and  even  many  bishops  became 
powerful  princes!"  **The  jurists  were  the  first 
to  debase  science  into  an  instrument  of  flattery; 
and  it  was  only  after  the  close  of  the  thirteenth 
century  theologians  followed  them  in  the  same 
course"  (p.  202).  We  may  hate  and  calumniate 
the  jurists;  but  if  their  doctrines  had  not  been 
based  on  the  general  convictions  of  their  contem- 
poraries, and  had  not  rested  on  a  solid  legal  ground- 
work, their  science  could  never  have  achieved  so 
much.  "  The  Interdicts,  and  the  ever  more  violent 
measures  of  the  Popes"  (p.  180),  could  have  effect, 
only  on  the  supposition  of  their  well-established 
moral  authority,  and  on  the  recognition  of  their  jus- 
tice. And  as  if  all  this  does  not  suffice,  pecuniary 
interests  are  brought  forward  ;  and  we  are  told  of 
the  extortions  whereby  the  Popes  drained  whole 
countries.  But  not  a  word  is  said  as  to  how  much 
those  very  Pontiffs  achieved  for  works  of  instruc- 
tion and  of  beneficence,  for  the  ransom  of  Christian 
slaves,  for  the  fitting  out  of  Missionaries,  for  the 
Crusades,  for  the  Union  of  the  Greeks,  for  the 
struggle  against  the  Turks,  for  the  interests  of 
Catholicism  in  lands  in  which  it  was  endangered. 
Not  a  word  is  said  as  to  the  grievous  afflictions  of 
the  Roman    Church,  especially  after  the  acts  of 


"  In  fact,  under  Innocent  III,,  bishops  soon  began  to  subscribe 
themselves  as  such  "  by  the  favour  of  the  Papal  See"  (Janus,  p.  171). 
The  formula  Dei  et  Apostolicae  Sedis  gratia,  is  doubtless  frequent 
in  the  thirteenth  century,  but  already  occurs  in  the  year  1093. 
"  Zaccaria  Dissert,  de  Rebus  ad  Hist.  Eccl.  Pertin."  Fulgin.  1781, 
t.  ii.  Dissert,  xii. 


The  Popedom  in  History.  225 

violence. on  the  part  of  the  Emperor  Frederic  IT., 
who,  in  his  antagonism  to  religion,  recoiled  from 
no  measure/^  and  forced  the  Popes  to  make  a  more 
extended  use  of  their  ecclesiastical  right  of  taxa- 
tion.^^  Nay,  scarcely  a  word  is  to  be  found  in  the 
pages  of  our  opponent  respecting  the  countless 
difficulties  by  which  Gregory  VII.,  Urban  II., 
Alexander  III.,  Gregory  IX.,  Innocent  IV.,  and  so 
many  other  Popes,  down  to  the  present  day,,  were 
beset. 

In  fact,  the  Apostolic  See  had  necessarily  become 
the  centre  of  a  new  political  order  of  states,  the 
representative  and  the  protector  of  Christian  in- 
ternational law.  But  the  reaction  of  the  secular 
power,  and  especially  the  efforts  of  the  Hohen- 
staufen  directed  towards  the  subjugation  of  Italy, 
and  more  particularly  of  Rome,  had  brought  about 
a  series  of  arduous  contests,  in  which  the  Pope  was 
more  than  once  obliged  to  lean  upon  France,  that 
then  obtained  an  ascendancy,  which  wounded  the 
national  susceptibilities  of  all  other  peoples,  and 
furthered  a  policy  for  the  prosecution  of  separate 
interests.'"^  Even  in  their  most  afflicted  condition, 
however,  the  Popes  fulfilled  their  duties  till  the 
entanglements  of  Italian  politics,  the  hostile  fer- 
menting elements  of  the  fifteenth  century,  and  the 
growing  corruption  of  m.orals,  rendered  their  task 
more  and  more  difficult.  Already  in  the  sixteenth 
century,  not  merely  the  Papal  throne,,  but  even 
Catholicism  itself,  appeared  on  the  brink  of  de- 
struction. But  then  an  energetic  resistance  arose; 
with  renovated  and  newly-gathered  strength,  the 
Catholic  Church  confronted  the  Protestant  world.'^ 

^-  Döllinger's  "  Manual  of  Church  History,"  ii.  p.  220. 

13  Phillips'  Can.  Law,  v.,  §  235,  p.  450,  seq. 

^\  Cf.DöUinger,  "Church  and  Churches,"  p.  33,  seq.  (InGerman. 

1^  Ranke,  loc.  cit.,  i-j  P-  377« 

P 


2  26  The  Popedom  in  History, 

We  see  holy  bishops,  priests,  and  monks  adorn 
the  Church ;  we  see  the  Popes  from  the  times  of 
Pius  IV.  and  Pius  V.  display  untiring  activity  for 
all  ecclesiastical  interests  ;  we  see  them  amid  a 
thousand  obstacles  propagate  religion,  defend 
with  the  utmost  intrepidity  against  powerful  rulers 
the  primitive  word  of  truth ;  we  see  them  combat, 
and  endure,  as  the  Sixth,  the  Seventh,  and  the 
Ninth  Pius  have  proved.  Nay,  even  the  hostile 
world  would  pay  their  homage  and  respect  to 
Pontiffs,  so  ardently  beloved  by  the  Faithful,  if  as 
they  are  now  so  secure,  and  powerful  in  their 
ecclesiastical  position,  they  could  but  resolve  to 
renounce  a  temporal  dominion,  so  odious  to  the 
"spirit  of  the  age,"'^  but  which  appears  to  the 
rigid  Ultramontanes  to  be  at  present  essentially 
necessary.'^ 

But  then  are  all  the  abuses  of  the  Roman  Curia, 
proved  by  so  many  witnesses  and  records,  to  be 
justified  ?  We  should  think  that  two  things  are 
here  to  be  distinguished,  the  Institute  of  the  Cttria 
itself,  and  the  abuses  that  in  the  course  of  ages  have 
crept  into  it.  That  the  Popes  of  later  times  needed 
a  greater  number  of  functionaries  than  those  of  an 
earlier  period,  no  one  will  be  inclined  to  dispute.  In 
the  same  way  no  one  will  assert,  that  the  modern 
State  should  dismiss  all  its  officials,  and  return  to 
the  relations  of  the  old  patriarchal  Government. 
In  the  eleventh  century  the  name  of  Curia  was 
not  yet  despised  ;  Peter  Damiani  says,  the  Roman 
Church  should  imitate  the  ancient  C^iria  of  the 
Romans,  its  senate,  in  order  to  subject  all  mankind 

Iß  *'  Only  if  the  Pope  ceases  to  be  an  Italian  Sovereign,  can  he 
claim  to  be  a  universal  Pojtti/ex:'  So  the  Times  expresses  itself. 
(See  the  notice  in  the  Augsburg  Allgemeine  Zeitung,  6th  Nov. 
1869.) 

17  The  Catholic  literature  on  this  point  is  so  extremely  rich,  that 
it  is  needless  to  refer  to  particular  writings. 


The  Popedom  in  History.  227 

to  the  laws  of  the  true  Emperor,  Christ.'^  At  an 
earlier  period,  we  already  find  numerous  func- 
tionaries of  the  Pope  ;^^  and  if  the  name  of  Curia 
gave  offence  to  Gerhoch  of  Reigersberg  and  others 
(p.  217),  it  had  still  long  before  been  used  in  a 
good  sense.^°  As  regards  abuses,  we  must  in  an 
accurate  statement  discriminate  the  several  func- 
tionaries, as  well  as  the  different  periods,  and  next 
again,  the  different  critics  of  the  Curia.  Of  these 
some  viewed  it  from  a  close  proximity,  others 
judged  it  at  a  distance;  some  blamed  it  from  a 
momentary  ill-humour,  others  from  long-cherished 
animosity.  The  ascetic  zeal  of  some  was  dis- 
pleased with  all  profane  forms  and  legal  insti- 
tutes ;'^  others  again  found  fault  with  the  covetous- 
ness  and  other  defects  of  the  functionaries  for  the 
time  being.  Among  the  witnesses  to  the  corrup- 
tion of  the  Roman  Curia,  which  had  partially  suc- 
cumbed to  the  temptations  of  wealth  and  luxur}'," 

^^  Opusc.  xxxL,  c.  7,  p.  540  {Mi^ne,  p.  p.  lat.  t,  cxlv).  Romana 
Ecclesia,  quae  sedes  est  Apostolorum,  aniiquam  debet  imitari  curiam 
Romanorum.  Sicut  enim  tunc  terrenus  ille  senatus  ad  hoc  communi- 
cabant  omne  consilium,  in  hoc  dirigebant  et  subtiliter  exercebant 
communis  industrias  Studium,  ut  cunctarum  gentium  mviltitudo 
Romano  subderetur  imperio,  ita  nunc  Apostolicas  Sedis  aeditui,  qui 
spirituales  sunt  universalis  Ecclesias  senatores,  huic  soli  studio  debent 
solerter  insistere,  ut  humanum  genus  veri  Imperatoris  Christi  valeant 
legibus  subjugare. 

^  Phillips'  Can.  Law.  vi.,  §  298,  seq.,  p.  343,  seq^.,  where  in  general 
much  rich  material  is  found. 

-"  TertuU.  ApoL,  c.  39. 

-^  Even  the  name  curiales  was  in  the  more  ancient  signification 
of  the  word  offensive  to  many  religious  people  (^-id.  Thomassin.  de 
vet.  disc,  p.  ii.,  L.  i.,c.  66,  n.  6,  seq.,  67  n.  c.  8,  seq.,  74,  n.  9).  Even 
Peter  Damiani  still  identifies  the  curiales  with  the  aulici.  Cf.  Opusc. 
xxii.,  c.  3,  p.  467.  Let  us  only  think  of  the  court  clergy  of  the  Em- 
peror Henry  IV  ! 

*■-  Erasmus  Rot.  Explic.  in  SjTnbol.,  p.  32.  In  nulla  autem 
ecclesiarum  diutius  viguit  pietatis  ardor  fideique  sinceritas,  in  nullam 
minus  haereseon  ac  tardius  irrepsit  malum,  quam  in  ecclesiam  Ro- 
manam.  Utinam  non  inundassent  hujusmundi  lenocinia  I  Yet  even 
Erasmus  is  not  herein  a  quite  unprej-udiced  witness. 


2  28  The  Popedo7n  in  History. 

as  well  as  to  that  of  the  Italian  clergy  in  general, 
there  are  found  on  the  one  hand  benevolent  men 
belonging  to  that  very  clergy,  as  well  as  many  pre- 
lates, who  attended  the  Fifth  Lateran  Council,  and 
that  of  Trent  (p.  363).  And  surely  those  indi- 
viduals are  not  to  be  considered  as  quite  corrupt, 
and  incapable  of  all  improvement,  who  make  an 
open  avowal  of  their  own  faults,  as  well  as  of 
those  of  others.  But  of  these  faults  all  are  by 
no  means  to  be  set  to  the  account  of  the  Cttria  ; 
many  are  far  more  to  be  ascribed  to  that 
heathen  spirit  aroused  by  the  Humanists,  as  well 
as  to  the  disorders  introduced  by  recent  wars,  as 
also  to  the  nomination  of  unworthy  bishops  by 
Sovereigns.^^  Even  authorities,  like  Adrian  VI., 
cited  by  Janus  (p.  357),  are  at  fault,  of  whom,  more- 
over, Pallavicini^"^  not  unjustly  remarks,  that  he  had 
never  before  his  Pontificate  accurately  known  the 
Roman  Ctiria,  that  in  this  matter  he  had  lent  but  a 
too  credulous  ear  to  the  misrepresentations  of  his 
courtiers  as  to  the  preceding  Pontificate,  that  in 
the  selection  of  able  men  he  was  not  near  so  happy 
as  Leo  X.,  and  that  his  reforming  zeal  sometimes 
transgressed  the  rules  of  prudence.  On  the  other 
hand,  men  are  brought  forward  as  witnesses  who 
were  the  notorious  enemies  of  the  Popes,  such  as 
the  scurrilous  Infessura,^^  and  such  as  the  too  cele- 
brated Nicholas  MachiaveUi,  who,  whatever  may 
have  been  his  intentions,  was  the  teacher  of  the 
most  unprincipled  and  profligate  system  of  politics 

23  How  far  in  this  respect  the  abuse  had  gone  in  Naples  is  shown 
by  the  case  that  occurred  under  Pope  Clement  XI.,  when  an  eccle- 
siastic presented  to  a  benefice  was,  on  account  of  his  total  ignor- 
ance of  the  Latin  language,  necessarily  rejected  by  Rome.  Vide 
Rigant.  in  Regul.,  xx.  Cancell.,  n.  41,  t.  ii.,  p.  292. 

^^  Pallavicini,  Hist.  Cone.  Trid.,  1.  ii.,  c.  7,  n.  9-14. 

25  Muratori  (Rer.  ital.  Script,  iii.  ii.,  pp.  1109, 1 175, 11 89)  calls  him 
proclivis  ad  maledicentiam.     Cf.  also  Raynaldus,  a.  1490,  n.  22. 


The  Popedom  in  History,  229 

ever  broached  in  the  world,  as  well  as  the  historian 
Guicciardini,  who  can  lay  claim  to  the  title  of  any- 
thing- but  an  impartial  historian  (pp.  355,  35^-'^ 
Hence  we  find  so  much  that  is  one-sided  and  ex- 
aggerated, that  individuals  are  treated  with  the 
greatest  injustice,  as,  for  example,  Cardinal  Caje- 
tan,  who  was  legate  in  Germany,  is  said  to  have 
"  embittered  the  Lutheran  business  by  his  insol- 
ence" (p.  361),  whereas  Luther  himself,  in  his  let- 
ter to  him,  acknowledged  his  friendliness  and  his 
agreeable  manners ;  and  from  the  Conference  at 
Augsburg,  we  certainly  may  infer  anything  but 
arrogance  on  the  part  of  the  legate.  We  are  told 
of  the  corruption  of  the  Milanese  Church  before 
the  times  of  St  Charles  Borromeo,  but  nothing  is 
related  of  the  acts  of  that  saint ;  the  decline  of 
morality  in  Rome  under  Leo  X.  is  described,  but 
nothing  is  said  of  the  reform  under  St  Pius  V.^^ 

This  corruption  of  the  Ctcria  is  a  noteworthy 
thing — an  old  bye-word  of  parties  hostile  to  Rome 
— an  old  subject  of  attempted  reforms  on  the  part 
of  men,  whether  called  or  uncalled.  The  Refor- 
mation here  is  no  small  work.  The  duty  and  the 
need  of  removing  abuses  was  constantly  recog- 
nized ;  it  was  only  the  difficulty  of  the  task,  and 
the  at  times  well-founded  fear  lest  with  the  tares 

2^  A  certain  predilection  for  authors  in  ill-repute  at  Rome  is  ap- 
parent in  the  very  citations  of  Janus.  We  find  among  his  authorities 
(pp.  423,  445,  473)  the  fanatical  Spanish  Jansenist  Villanueva  (vid. 
respecting  him  Fuster  Escritores  de  Valencia,  ii.,  p.  304,  seq.  Cas- 
tillo Historia  critica  de  las  negociaciones  con  Roma.  Madrid,  1859, 
vol.  ii.,  c.  7,  p.  147,  nota),  the  French  Jansenist  Arnauld  (p.  414), 
the  Calvinstic  Church  historian  Hottinger  (p.  344),  the  modern  ad- 
versary of  the  Popes  Antonio  Gennarelli  (p.  26).  Launoy  is  far 
more  used  than  cited  (329).  Willingly  is  the  authority  of  Matthew 
Paris  alleged  (pp.  210,  237,  343,  G.),  who,  moreover,  is  full  of  the 
grossest  errors.  (See  DöUinger  Manual,  ii.,  p.  279.)  With  respect 
to  Robert  of  Lincoln  (p.  219),  his  assertions  are  refuted  by  Ray- 
naldus  (anno.  1253,  n.  43,  anno.  1254,  n.  71). 

-''  Cf.  Ranke,  loc.  ciL,  i.,  p.  361. 


230  The  Popedojn  in  History. 

the  wheat  also  might  be  plucked  up,  which  often 
delayed  the  work  of  reform.''^  The  great  difficulty 
of  this  task  even  Janus  appears  to  feel,  when  he 
represents  the  Popes  as  dependent  on  the  Curia, 
and  incapable  of  bursting  their  fetters  asunder 
(pp.  183,  184),  and  when  he  lays  the  charge  of 
corruption  more  on  the  system,  than  on  persons  (p. 
1 84).  However,  it  cannot  be  denied  that  many  evils 
formerly  lamented  have  now  been  in  part  com- 
pletely set  aside,  in  part  considerably  diminished  ; 
and  it  is  very  unjust  to  rake  together  abuses  from 
different  ages,  as  if  they  had  remained  uniformly 
the  same.  We  can  now  no  longer  say  that  through 
the  Cti-ria  Simony  is  the  mistress  of  the  Church 
(p.  222) ;  that  the  Curia  draws  all  petty  details  to 
itself  (p.  188);  the  granting  of  benefices  by  the 
Roman  See  has  in  most  countries  almost  entirely 
ceased  ;  the  dues  for  the  Pallia  and  other  imposts 
have  been  considerably  reduced  ;  the  purchase  of 
places  has  disappeared  ;  the  procedure  of  many 
tribunals  has,  by  the  wise  constitutions  of  Pius  V., 
Sixtus  v.,  Benedict  XIV.,  and  other  Pontiffs,  been 
better  regulated  ;^^  and  ameliorations  have  been 
constantly  designed,  and  introduced  slowly  but 
surely  into  life. 

Well  worthy  of  consideration,  in  more  than  one 
respect,  are  the  words  which  the  Papal  legate 
Aleander  addressed  on  this  matter,  on  the  13th 
February  1 5  21,  to  the  diet  of  Worms.^°  Passing 
to  the  charges  against  Rome,  he  rejoices  to  speak 
before  men  whose  minds  are  not  entangled  by  the 

-^  DöUinger,  "Church  and  Churches,"  xxxi.,  No.  16. 

-^  Phillips'  Can.  Law,  vi.,  §  315,  p.  520,  seq.;  §  319,  p.  561,  seq.; 
§  320,  p.  565,  seq.  Bangen,  "The  Roman  Citria."  Münster,  1854. 
Zaccaria  Antifebronio,  i.,  p.  xii.,  Ixxxii.,  seq.  For  the  more  ancient 
times  compare  still  Henric.  Institor.,  ap.  Raynalcl.  anno.  1498,  n. 
25,  seq. 

^"  Pallav.  Hist.  Cone.  Trid.,  1.  i.,  c.  25,  n.  13,  seq. 


The  Popedovi  in  History.  2  3 1 

prejudices  of  the  multitude  ;  and  he  declares  that 
it  enters  not  into  his  design  to  occupy  their  atten- 
tion with  the  course  of  procedure  of  the  tribunals, 
and  with  the  functionaries  of  Rome.  In  the  same 
way  as  royal  chambers  are  sometimes  filled  with 
dust,  from  which  they  must  from  time  to  time  be 
cleansed ;  so  into  the  courts  of  princes  abuses  creep, 
which  often  require  reform.  The  insight  of  the 
Emperor,  and  of  this  illustrious  Diet,  into  the  wants 
of  Germany,  is  not  so  contracted,  nor  their  credit 
with  the  Roman  See  so  small,  that  they  could  not — 
without  the  tragic  exclamations,  and  the  infuriated 
cries  of  a  wrangling  deserter,  carried  away  by  the 
blindness  of  his  rage — of  themselves  make  to  the 
Vicar  of  Christ  the  necessary  representations,  and 
that  the  latter  would  not  be  ready  to  meet  their 
just  demands. 

But  what  Luther  seeks  to  destroy  is  the  Papal 
power  itself.  His  chief  reason  is,  that  one  acts  at 
Rome  otherwise  than  one  teaches  ;  hence  men  are 
taught  not  by  truth,  but  by  deception.  To  this 
we  may  reply,  that  whoso  will  not  lend  his  ear  to 
calumny,  but  examine  the  matter  with  his  own  eyes, 
will  find  in  Rome  much  that  is  great  and  worthy 
of  admiration — so  much  time,  so  much  money  em- 
ployed in  the  service  of  God,  such  abundant  alms 
to  the  poor,  such  abstinence  from  all  which  the 
senses  crave,  and  which  in  other  countries  is  taken 
without  shame,  such  blamelessness  of  conduct  in 
most  of  the  members  of  the  Apostolic  Senate,  and 
in  the  other  leading  classes  of  society,  that  one  is 
forced  to  avow,  here  is  manifested  something  quite 
extraordinary,  something  exalted  above  the  powers 
of  m.en.  I  pass  over  the  words  of  Christ  when  He 
exhorts  us  to  follow  the  doctrine,  and  not  the 
example,  of  those  who  sit  in  the  first  chair  of  in- 
struction   (Matt,   xxiii.   2,   3).      But    I    say   that, 


232  The  Popedom  i7i  History. 

according  to  the  argument  of  Luther,  the  right 
logical  conclusion  would  be  the  very  reverse.  It 
is,  I  assert,  a  clear  proof  of  a  false  religion,  when 
its  constituted  guides,  although  ever  increasing 
in  numbers,  still  through  the  course  of  ages  are 
wont  exactly  to  practise  what  they  teach  and  pre- 
scribe. It  was  so  with  the  religion  of  the  Pagan 
Romans,  it  is  so  with  that  of  Mohammed.  But  it 
is  not  so  with  the  religion  which  the  Popes  of 
Rome  teach.  They  professed  at  all  times  that 
religion,  although  it  condemns  all  of  them  as  sub- 
ject to  defects,  many  of  them  as  in  certain  respects 
guilty,  some  (I  say  it  boldly)  as  vicious,  although 
this  religion  forces  them  to  a  certain  submission, 
which  mortifies  their  inclinations,  and  subjects 
many  of  their  acts  that,  out  of  the  pale  of  this 
religion,  would  be  irreproachable  to  public  blame 
in  their  Hfe-time,  and  after  death  to  historical 
ignominy,  and  although  this  religion,  in  respect 
of  eternal  glory,  concedes,  even  here  below,  to 
a  bare-footed  monk  a  pre-eminence  over  the 
crowned  Pontiff.  What  earthly  gratifications, 
what  earthly  interests  could  have  led  to  the  inven- 
tion of  this  .religion  t  How  would  it  have  been 
possible  for  the  Popes,  though  at  times  vicious, 
and  in  other  things  often  guided  by  quite  opposite 
views,  to  have  concurred  with  such  steadfastness, 
such  uniformity,  and  such  concord  in  the  confir- 
mation of  the  same  doctrine,  if  truth  had  not  dic- 
tated to  them  this  religion,  and  heaven  itself  in- 
spired them  >  That  in  Rome,  even  among  the 
prelates,  faults,  and  even  very  grave  ones,  are  com- 
mitted, is  not  there  arrogantly  denied,  but  con- 
fessed with  humility.  Rome  it  is  which  not  very 
long  ago  canonized  the  same  Bernard,  who  in  his 
life-time  had  so  bitterly  censured  her  in  his  writ- 
ings.    If  Luther  calls  Rome  the  home  of  hypo- 


The  Popedom  in  Histoiy.  233 

crisy,  so  this  is  the  ordinary  calumny  of  unbridled 
vice  against  the  reverence  paid  to  virtue,  and  en- 
vied by  vice  ;  and  were  it  true,  who  does  not  know 
that  hypocrisy  dwells  only  where  genuine  virtue 
is  to  be  found  ?  If  genuine  gold  were  not  held  in 
high  estimation,  who  would  give  himself  the  trouble 
of  forging  such  coin  ?  And  so  no  one  will  endea- 
vour, at  the  cost  of  an  irksome  dissimulation,  to 
appear  virtuous  in  a  community,  where  he  sees  not 
virtue  rewarded  and  revered.  After  the  legate 
had  shown  how  the  Popes  could  not  have  usurped 
the  supreme  power  in  the  Church,  and  how  neces- 
sary that  authority  was  for  all,  that  we  should  not 
apply  the  standard  of  earlier  times  to  the  circum- 
stances of  a  later  period,  and  that  the  political  inde- 
pendence of  the  Holy  See  appears  to  be  a  necessity, 
he  then  speaks  on  the  contributions  of  Christendom 
for  the  adequate  endowment  of  the  head  of  the 
Church,  and  for  the  splendour  of  the  Church  itself. 
"  Voluntary  poverty  is  commended  in  Rome  ;  its 
promoters  revered,  its  despisers  condemned  ;  but  so 
high  a  virtue  is  not  to  be  desired  or  to  be  expected 
of  all.  Laws  are  then  worst  when  they  exact  the 
best — that  is  to  say,  when  they  prescribe  a  degree 
of  perfection  not  to  be  hoped  for  from  all.  God 
will  not  root  out  from  all  souls  the  innate  inclina- 
tions, nor  impart  to  all  an  heroic  sanctity.  In  the 
service  of  the  Lord,  therefore,  human  incommodi- 
ties  must  be  compensated  for  by  human  advantages ; 
and  therefore  we  desire  for  the  Church  peace,  and 
not  persecution.  The  latter  state  of  things  is  doubt- 
less more  fruitful  in  saints ;  but  the  former,  from 
its  greater  ease,  is  far  more  conducive  to  the 
salvation  of  souls.  The  recourse  to  a  human  stim- 
ulus does  not,  by  any  means,  deprive  a  good 
work  undertaken  for  the  glory  of  God  of  its  merit, 
as  we  may  see  from  the  many  earthly  rewards 


2  34  The  Popedom  in  History. 

which  God  promised  in  the  Old  Testament.  If 
the  capital  of  the  Christian  world  is  to  be  filled 
with  noble,  capable,  learned,  and  able  men,  who 
have  left  their  homes,  who  have  given  up  domestic 
joys,  and  submitted  to  many  hardships ;  so  the 
prospect  of  honours  and  emoluments  must  serve 
to  compensate  and  facilitate  their  sacrifices.  But 
it  is  said,  things  could  yet  be  tolerated,  if  in 
Rome  rewards  at  least  were  bestowed  according 
to  merit.  I  reply,  then  every  state  would  be 
deprived  of  the  means  of  rewarding  merit  ;  for 
none  possess  in  the  distribution  of  recompenses  an 
unerring  wisdom  and  spirit  of  justice.  "  Nay,"  as 
an  excellent  writer  has  observed,  "  mistakes  in  this 
matter  are  necessary,  in  order  to  preserve  peace 
and  order  in  the  state ;  for  were  it  once  fixed  and 
certain  that  the  greater  reward  would  ever  be  the 
lot  of  the  greater  merit,  then  it  would  be  intoler- 
able to  the  individual  to  see  himself  repulsed.  It 
is  a  splendid  solace  to  be  able  to  accuse  fortune  as 
the  foe  to  virtue."  Moreover,  it  is  shown  that  the 
benefices  bestowed  by  the  Pope  out  of  the  Ecclesi- 
astical States  are,  for  the  most  part,  conferred  on 
natives  of  the  countries  in  question  ;  and  where 
this  is  not  the  case,  a  compensation  is  found  in  an 
interchange  with  other  provinces  ;  that  the  sums 
demanded  for  the  despatch  of  bulls  and  rescripts 
would  not  suffice  for  the  maintenance  of  even  the 
smallest  court  ;^^  that  in  these  monies  ecclesiastics 
of  all  lands  have  a  share  ;  that  numerous  institutes 
of  beneficence  for  the  whole  of  Christendom  exist 
in  Rome ;  and  that  many  scholars  and  artists  find 

^^  Janus  appeals  (p.  374,  seq.,  n.  394,  seq.)  to  the  "Taxse  Cancel- 
lariae  Apostolicse,"  printed  in  Rome  under  Julius  II.  and  Leo  X., 
and  which  cannot  be  distinguished  from  the  editions  put  forth  by 
Protestants.  But  does  he  not  know  how  much  was  published  in 
the  sixteenth  century  with  the  false  print  of  Rome  ? 


The  Popedom  in  History 


-JO 


support   in   that  city,    as    towards    these,   indeed. 
Pope  Leo  X.  displayed  the  greatest  munificence. 

Had  Janus  now,  in  the  spirit  of  a  St  Bernard 
and  of  other  saints,  fairly  exposed  the  still  existing 
defects  in  the  Ciiriay  and  recommended  their  re- 
moval, instead  of  condemning  the  whole  "  system," 
and  indulging  in  such  gross  and  manifold  exag- 
geration, he  would  then  have  rendered  a  service  to 
the  cause  of  Christendom,  and  been  entitled  to 
our  warmest  thanks.  Had  he  proposed  well- 
grounded  schemes  of  reform,  his  work  would  cer- 
tainly not  have  met  the  fate  of  remaining  utterly 
disregarded,  or  (like  to  that  opinion  which  Paul 
IV.,  before  his  accession  to  the  pontifical  throne, 
had  put  forth,  and  afterwards,  as  Janus  assumes, 
condemned, ^^)  of  incurring  a  prohibition ; — an  event 
which  on  no  account  do  we  desire.  But  it  only 
injures  the  cause,  w^hen  facts  and  legal  principles 
are  inextricably  confused,  and  the  truth,  which 
could  be  suggested,  is  distorted  and  disfigured  by 
the  admixture  of  falsehood."  For  the  tenfold 
grosser  abuses  of  secular  courts  and  of  official 
circles,  men  have  no  eyes  ;  for  harsher  discords  in 
other  spheres,  they  possess  no  ears.  But  it  is  only 
when  the  Papal  court  is  in  question,  when  the 
organs  of  the  head  of  the  Church  are  in  question, 
they  possess  Argus  eyes,  they  hear  every  murmur, 
they  gather  notices  from  the  natives  of  all  lands, 

'-  That  Paul  IV.,  when  Pope,  placed  on  the  Index  his  former 
opinion  (as  asserted  by  Janus,  p.  233,  n.  I.)  is  by  no  means 
proved.  Vide  Bennettis,  p.  1 1,  t.  v.  Append.,  §  viii.,  p.  739-741. 
Zaccaria,  loc.  cit.,  p.  Ixxxi.,  seq. 

^  We  speak  not  of  the  exemptions  so  much  complained  of,  but 
which  have  been,  since  the  Council  of  Trent,  diminished  (Janus,  p. 
166),  and  which  the  Oriental-patriarchs  exercised  also.  Thomassin, 
op.  cit.,  P.  i.,  L.  i.,  c.  9,  n.  15  ;  c.  16,  n.  I.  L.  iii.,  c.  30,  ^^5.  Ben- 
nettis, P.  ii.,  t.  iv.,  p.  554,  seq.  Goar  Eucholog.  Gr.,  P.  612,  note. 
Ebedjesu  Collect.  Can.,  Tract,  vii.,  c.  6  (Mai  Nova.  Coll.,  x.  p. 
I33>  134). 


236  The  Popedom  in  History, 

from  the  members  of  various  races  and  classes  ; 
they  give  ear  to  the  complaints  of  disappointed 
ambition,  of  unmasked  selfishness,  of  bankrupt 
speculation,  of  petty  jealousy,  of  professional  slan- 
der, and  circulate  all  these  reports  against  Rome, 
giving  new  strength  to  the  no-Popery  cry ;  while 
Rome  herself,  constantly  reviled,  remains  in  her 
attitude  of  calm  dignity,  and  belies  not  the  ancient 
saying,  "  Roma  patiens,  quia  aeterna." 

Still  the  charges  are  not  yet  ended.  On  the 
Papacy  still  lies  the  curse  of  the  Inquisition,  and 
of  Witchcraft.  The  Inquisition,  according  to 
Janus,  "  had  the  triple  object,  first,  to  make  the 
Papal  system  irresistible;  secondly,  to  impede  any 
disclosure  of  its  rotten  foundations  ;  and,  thirdly, 
to  bring  the  Infallibility  theory  into  full  possession" 
(p-  235).  We  shall  say  nothing  about  the  rotten 
foundations,  which  we  have  already  had  occasion 
to  examine ;  we  shall  pass  over  the  by  no  means 
stringent  arguments,  as  well  as  the  inquiry  into  the 
expressions  of  the  Ancient  Fathers.^'^  But  yet 
thus  much  in  our  opinion  history  clearly  shows, 
namely,  that  the  immediate  object  of  the  Inquisi- 
tion was  to  purge  the  Christian  countries  of  Europe 
of  the  most  dangerous  sects,  that  sought  to  bring 
about  not  only  a  religious,  but  a  social  and  political 
revolution  ;  that  assailed  the  principles  of  marriage, 
the  family,  property,  and  the  whole  organisation  of 
state,  and  thereby  rendered  the  severest  measures 
necessary  for  the  protection  of  society.^^  But  it  is 
more  than  one-sided  to  disreg^ard  all  the  existinsr 
relations  of  society,  to  refer  everything  exclusively 
to  Papal  power,  and  to  pass  over  all  that  has  been 
said  in  favour  of  the  Popes,  all  that  has  been  done 

^^  Aug.  ep,  185,  ad  Bonifac.  Retract,  ii.  5.  Hier,  in  Gal.  5,  9  ep. 
ad  Ripar,  c.  Vigil.  109  n.  3  Leo  M.  ep.  15  ad  Turrib.  Greg.  M.  L. 
I.  ep.  74  0pp.  ii.  558  ed.  Paris.  1705.    Isid.  Hispal.  Sent.  iii.  51. 

^^  Dollinger's  "  Church  and  Churches,"  pp.  50,  51. 


The  Popedom  in  History.  237 

by  them  for  averting  harsher  measures,  as,  for  ex- 
ample, by  Innocent  1 1 1,  in  regard  to  the  Waldenses.^*" 
The  ecclesiastical  and  the  civil  laws  were  in'rcspect 
to  heretics  in  perfect  harmony ;  and  the  Reformers 
of  the  sixteenth  century  started  from  the  same 
principles.  For  the  particulars  we  beg  leave  to 
refer  to  larger  works.^^ 

But  even  "  the  whole  treatment  of  witchcraft,  as 
it  existed  from  the  thirteenth  to  the  seventeenth 
century,  was  partly  the  direct,  partly  the  indirect, 
result  of  the  belief  in  the  irrefragable  authority  of 
the  Pope"  (p.  249).  But  in  the  working  out  of  this 
assertion,  very  many  things  have  been  left  out,  as, 
for  example,  that  in  the  year  799,  a  German  Synod 
ordained  that  enchanters  and  witches  should  be 
incarcerated  and  brought,  if  possible,  by  the  arch- 
priest  to  an  avowal  of  their  crime  ;^^  that  Gregory 
VII.  expressed  himself  against  a  belief  in  witch- 
craft;^^ that  besides  "an  incidental  expression  of 
St  Augustin,  used  in  mere  blind  credulity"  (p.  252), 
passages  of  other  Fathers  lay  before  the  eyes  of 
the  mediaeval  divines.'^^  Yet  these  are  trifles.  But 
did  not  a  belief  in  magic  and  in  witches  exist  among 
the  Greeks  also  P"^'     Was  not  under  John  IV.,  the 


3^  Innoc.  iii.  Lib.  xi.,  ep.  198.  ;  L.  xii.,  ep.  17  ;  L.  ii.,  ep.  141  ;  L. 
xiii.,  ep.  78. 

■*^  Hefele's  Cardinal  Ximenes,  2d  Edition,  p.  291,  scq.  Concil. 
vii.,  p.  214,  seq.  Beidtel's  Can.  Law,  p.  563,  seq^.  Devoti  Instit.  Can. 
L.  iv.  tit. 8,  t.  iv.,  p.  lOi,  seq.;  ed  Romae  1794.  That,  moreover,  the 
Inquisition  was  not  so  barbarous  in  Italy,  may  be  inferred  from  the 
many  very  free  expressions  against  Rome  and  the  hierarchy,  which 
Janus  has  carefully  collected.  He  himself  allows  (p.  356)  that  it  is 
worth  showing,  that  in  spite  of  the  Inquisition,  much  could  be  said 
in  Italy,  and  many  an  avowal  made. 

'^  Hefele,  Cone,  iii.,  p.  684,  c.  15. 

23  L.  vii.  ep.  21,  Cf.  Neander  ii.,  p.  380. 

*"  Cf.  in  Gratian  the  Causa  xxvi.  q.  5,  and  the  passages  in  Görres 
Mysticism  (vol.  iii.  p.  44,  seq.)  It  is  unnecessary  to  observe  that 
this  work,  in  other  respects,  much  needs  a  prudent  criticism. 

^^  Psell.  de  dcemonum  operat.  c.  7-19.  Phot.  Nomoc.  ix.  25,  xii. 
3,  xiii.  20.    Matth.  Blaster.  Syntagma  alph.  M.  c.  i. 


238  The  Popedom  in  Histojy. 

Faster,  who  died  In  595,  a  certain  Paulinus  exe- 
cuted as  a  magician  in  Constantinople  ?  "^^  Were 
not  in  the  East  investigations  carried  on  against 
such  persons,  especially  in  the  fourteenth  century, 
when,  for  example,  the  Patriarch  John  XIV.  com- 
missioned ecclesiastics  to  go  round  the  city,  seeking 
for  wizards,  and  when  in  this  quest,  were  they  not 
aided  by  the  civil  functionaries  }^^  Did  the  Popes 
transplant  witchcraft  to  the  schismatical  Greeks 
also  ?  Is  it  worth  while  to  give  any  further  refuta- 
tion to  such  charges  ? 

Let  us  revert  to  the  Papacy,  which  we  see  is  free 
from  those  appendages,  that  some  desired  to  attach 
to  it.  One  of  our  German  classics  says,  it  is  a 
severe  but  just  law  of  destiny,  that  as  all  evil,  so 
all  tyranny  is  sure  to  wear  itself  out.'^'^  Is  this  law 
to  be  belied  in  the  Papacy  alone,  or  doth  this  insti- 
tution show  itself  to  be  not  such  a  despotism,  as 
many  would  fain  make  us  believe.  Here  even 
Janus  becomes  thoughtful.  '*  It  is  a  psychological 
marvel,"  says  he,  **  how  this  unnatural  theory  of  a 
priestly  domination,  embracing  the  whole  world, 
controlling  and  subjugating  the  whole  of  life,  could 
ever  have  become  established"  (p.  182).  And  we 
add,  it  is  the  greatest  enigma  how  such  an  institu- 
tion ever  came  into  life.  This  enigma  Janus  does 
not  solve.  All  his  explanations  are  too  artificial, 
too  forced  ;  the  circumstances  adduced  by  him 
all  appear  incapable  of  bringing  about  the  end 
proposed.  But  if  we  assume  the  Popedom  to 
be  a  divine,  beneficent  institution,  thoroughly 
monarchical    indeed,    but   not   so    despotic,    not 

^2  Theophyl.  Simoc.  I,  ii.,  pp.  56,  57, 

^^  Acta  Patriarch.  Constantin,  Miiller.et  Miklosich  t.  1.,  Doc.  85,  p. 
184-187.  Cf.  ibid.,  Doc.  79,  80,  86,  134,  137,  153,  228,  292,  377, 
331,     Also  Balsam,  in  c.  24.    Ancyr.  61  Trull.  Basil.  Can.  83. 

*■'  Herder  in  his  "  Ideas  on  the  Philosophy  of  the  History  of  Man- 
kind." 


The  Popedom  in  History.  239 

so  unlimited,  as  it  has  been  represented,  but 
circumscribed  by  its  object,  by  the  spirit  and  the 
practice  of  the  Church,  by  primitive  tradition  and 
established  rules — moreover,  protected  and  borne 
up  by  the  Divine  aid  ;  then  not  only  will  the  enigma 
of  the  past,  but  that  of  the  present  also,  find  for  the 
most  part  its  solution. 


CHAPTER  XI. 

THE  CHURCH,  THE  DOGMA,  AND  THE  NEW 
COUNCIL. 

|HAT  the  modern  opponents  of  the  theory 
of  InfallibiHty,  not  so  much  by  the  force 
of  an  inexorable  logic,  as  from  their  own 
want  of  theological  skill,  have  been  driven 
to  the  point  of  assailing  the  Papal  supremacy 
itself — acknowledged,  as  it  is,  throughout  the  whole 
Catholic  Church,  as  existing_/>/r^  divino — we  have 
already  seen.  But  the  opposition  is  pushed  still 
further :  it  is  directed  against  the  dogma  of  the 
Church  itself,  as  taught  not  merely  in  every  dog- 
matic treatise,  but  in  every  catechism. 

According  to  Catholic  doctrine,  the  true  Church 
of  Christ  possesses  at  all  times  four  essential 
notes  by  which  she  may  be  ever  recognized, 
namely,  sJie  is  One,  Holy,  Catholic,  Apostolical. 
The  Church  hath  for  her  the  promise  of  Christ, 
that  He  would  remain  with  her  *'  all  days,''  even 
to  the  consummation  of  the  world  (Matt,  xxviii. 
20)  ;  that  against  her,  founded  on  the  rock  (Peter), 
the  gates  of  hell  would  never  prevail  (Matt.  xvi. 
18)  ;  that  the  Paraclete,  the  Spirit  of  truth,  would 
abide  with  her/^r  evcj',  and  teach  her  all  truth  (John 
xiv.   16-18).      There  cannot  be  a  single  moment 


The  CJmrch,  the  Dogma,  &c.         241 

in  history  at  which  the  Church  is  bereft  of  this 
assistance ;  she  can  never  fall  away  from  the  truth  ; 
she  is  not  merely  in  the  days  of  the  apostles,  not 
merely  in  the  first  six  or  seven  centuries,  but  at 
all  times  the  "  pillar  and  ground  of  the  truth"  (i 
Tim.  iii.  1 5).  She  is  at  all  times  in  possession  of  the 
truth  ;  ^  she  hath  at  all  times  the  tradition  of  the 
apostles ;  "  ^  never  can  it  be  said  she  hath  experi- 
enced a  falsification  of  the  true  doctrine  till  this  or 
that  reformer  came  to  her  aid.^  She  is  inundated 
wath  the  light  of  the  Lord,  and  she  pours  forth  her 
rays  over  the  whole  surface  of  the  earth.  She,  the 
Bride  of  the  Lord,  can  never  be  an  adulteress ; 
she  is  inviolate  and  pure."^  She  is  unconquerable  ; 
and  it  were  easier  for  the  sun  to  become  extinct, 
than  for  her  to  be  annihilated.^  All  in  the  Church 
is  guided  by  God.^ 

In  conformity  with  these  fundamental  doctrines 
all  theologians  have  rejected  the  opinion  of  the 
Jansenists,   and   of  their   disciples,   respecting   an 

^  Iren.  adv.  hser.,  iii.  4  :  depositorium  dives  veritatis. 

-  Tert.  adv.  Marc,  i.  21  :  Non  alia  agnoscenda  erit  traditio  Apo- 
stolorum,  quam  quos  Jwdie  apud  ipsorum  ecclesias  editur. 

^  Loc.  cit.,  i.  20  :  O  Christe,  patientissime  Domine,  qui  tot  annis 
interversionem  pr^edicationis  ture  sustinuisti,  donee  tiloi  scilicet  Mar- 
cion  subveniret !     Cf.  de  prcescript,  c.  28. 

•*  Cypr.  de  unit.  Eccles.,  c.  5,  6,  p.  214.  Ed.  Vendob.  1868. 
(Corp.  script,  eccl.  lat.  ed.  impens.  acad.  Goes.,  t.  iii.,  p.  i.)  Even 
the  words  following,  which  we  omit  for  the  sake  of  brevity,  are 
worthy  of  all  consideration. 

^  Chrys.  horn.  4  in  illud  :  Vidi  Dominum,  n.  2  (Mignelvi.,  pp. 
121,  122)  :  "  jxavdaveru}  rijs  aXrjdetas  ttjv  Icrxi"^,  ttws  evKoXwrepov  top 
t]\lou  aßeaörjvai,  rj  ttjv  kKKkrjaiav  acpavLadrivaL.  Learn  the  force  of 
truth,  that  it  is  easier  for  the  sun  to  be  extinguished,  than  for  the 
Church  to  disappear." 

6  Cypr.  ep.  59  (al.  55)  ad  Cornel.,  n.  5,  p.  177  :  Cum  ille  (Do- 
minus  Matth.,  10,  29)  nee  minima  fieri  sine  voluntate  Dei  dicat, 
existimat  aliquis  siinivia  d  magna  aut  non  sciente  aut  non  per- 
mittente  Deo  in  Ecclcsia  Dei  fieri  et  sacerdotes,  id  est  dispen- 
satores  ejus,  non  de  ejus  sententia  ordinari?  Hoc  est  fidem  non 
habere,  qua  vivimus,  hoc  est  Deo  honorem  non  dare,  cujus  nutu  et 
arbitrio  regi  et  gubernari  omnia  scimus  et  credimus. 


242  The  Church,  the  Dogma, 

overclouding  and  obscuration  of  the  Church  en- 
during for  centuries,  as  one  incompatible  with 
Catholic  principle.  And  they  have  equally  repu- 
diated the  assertion,  that  a  false  doctrine  could 
have  maintained  itself  throughout  the  whole  Middle 
Age,  and  even  have  found  approval  and  encour- 
agement on  the  part  of  the  Apostolic  See.  How 
is  the  Church  to  be  that  Church  of  Christ  depicted 
by  the  Fathers,  if  its  central  guidance  has  become 
all  corrupt,  its  head  has  departed  from  the  right 
way,  if  the  Papacy,  as  it  became  after  the  year 
845,  "presents  the  appearance  of  a  disfiguring, 
sickly,  and  choking  excrescence  on  the  organisa- 
tion of  the  Church,  hindering  and  decomposing 
the  action  of  its  vital  powers,  and  bringing  mani- 
fold diseases  in  its  train.?"  (Pref.  xix.)  If  when 
one  member  suffereth,  all  the  other  members 
suffer  (i  Cor.  xii.  26),  how  much  more  must  the 
members  of  the  Church  suffer,  when  their  head 
hath  become  diseased,  or  even  "  a  disfiguring, 
sickly  excrescence  } "  According  to  the  doctrine 
of  the  Fathers,  the  adverse  condition  of  the  Apos- 
tolic See  involves  the  decay  of  all  other  churches  ; 
on  that  central  See  dependeth  all  the  weal  and 
prosperity  of  the  Church.^  Nay  more,  if  a  false 
doctrine  obtained  for  centuries  the  ascendancy, 
then  is  the  infallibiHty  of  the  Church  herself  de- 
stroyed. Passive  and  active  infallibility  are  inse- 
parably connected;  and  with  the  infallibility  of  the 

'  Petrus  Damiani  Opus,  iv.,  p.  67,  ed.  Migne:  Hac  (Sede  Apos- 
tolica)  stante  reliquae  stant ;  sin  autem  hcec,  quas  omnium  funda- 
mentum  est  et  basis,  obruitur,  ceterarum  quoque  status  necesse  est 
collabatur.  So  already  perceived  the  Fathers  of  Aquileia  in  their 
address  to  the  emperors,  A.D.  381  (Coustant,  p.  554),  wherein  they 
beseech  them  not  to  permit  Ursinus  to  carry  on  any  intrigues  in  the 
Roman  Church,  for  by  the  perturbation  of  the  latter  the  whole 
Church  is  imperilled  ;  inde  enim  (from  the  ecclesia  Romana,  totius 
orbis  Romani  caput)  et  in  omnes  venerandse  communionis  jura 
dimanant. 


and  the  New  Cotmcil.  243 

Church  her  indefectibility  is  lost.  Whoever  can 
conceive  it  as  barely  possible,  that  "  Catholicism, 
hitherto  regarded  as  a  universal  religion,  would, 
by  a  notable  irony  of  its  fate,  be  transformed  into 
the  precise  opposite  of  what  its  name  and  notion 
imports"  (p.  9) ;  such  a  man  must  call  in  question 
all  providential  guidance  of  the  Church,  all  the 
Divine  assistance  assured  to  her,  and  all  virtue  in 
the  promises  given  unto  her ;  he  must  simply  quit 
the  ground-work  of  Catholic  principle  ;  he  must 
choose  another  set  of  principles  ;  and  for  him  "  the 
pretended  great  unity  of  the  Roman  Church  would 
be  to-day  no  more  than  a  myth."^  He  has  no 
longer  any  right  to  appeal  to  the  Gallicans  and 
their  doctrines.^  For  the  latter  believe,  for  example, 
that  the  indefectibility  of  the  Roman  Church  lies, 
not  in  the  one  or  the  other  Pope,  but  in  the  series 
of  the  successors  of  Peter,  and  that  never  in  this 
Church  could  an  error  obtain  lasting  existence/^ 
But  according  to  the  theology  of  Janus,  several 
errors  of  the  most  grievous  kind  have  obtained  a 
firm  footing  in  the  Roman  Church,  not  only  for  a 
time,  but  for  centuries,  and  even  down  to  the  pre- 
sent day.  The  Universal  Church  has,  by  the  very 
fact  that  it  did  not  correct  public  and  widely- 
spread  errors,  given  to  them  a  formal  approbation  ; 
and  even  the  reform  by  the  Council  of  Trent  was, 
we  are  told,  no  real,  but  only  a  pretended  reform 
(p.  366,  w.  3).  A  Church,  which  honours  among  her 
saints  a  hierarch  so  stigmatised  as  is  Gregory  VII. 
in  the  pages  of  Janus,'"  which  even  in  the  hght  of 

^  AUgei7ieine  Zeitung,  2 ist  Oct.  1869,  App.  p.  4531. 

^  What  Zaccaria  (Antifebronio,  t.  i.,  Introd.,  p.  Iv.,  seq.)  shows 
in  opposition  to  Febronius,  has  its  force  in  respect  to  our  authors  also. 

^^  Defensio  declarationis  Cleri  Gallic,  t.  i.,  1.  iii.,  c.  3 ;  1.  i.,  c.  18  ; 
t.  ii.,  1.  XV.,  c.  6,  seq. 

^^  On  his  canonization,  of.  Fessler,  "  ]Miscellaneous  Writings  upon 
Canon  Law  and  Eccl.  History,"  p.  39,  seq.     Freiburg,  1869. 


244  ^-^^  Church,  the  Dogma, 

our  century  has  canonized  bloodthirsty  inquisitors, 
like  a  Peter  Arbues/^  which  has  hitherto  oppressed, 
and  suffered  to  be  oppressed,  all  rational  thought, 
all  scientific  aims,  which  has  checked  the  purest 
and  the  noblest  aspirations  of  the  human  mind 
thirsting  after  knowledge,  which  even  in  her  solemn 
assemblies  has  achieved  nothing  to  repair  the  evil — ■ 
how  can  such  a  Church  be  the  true  Church  of  God  ? 

More  consistent,  therefore,  those  appear  to  be, 
who  contest  in  general  the  infallibility  of  CEcu- 
menical  Councils  and  of  the  Church.  This  recog- 
nition is  due  to  the  philosopher  Frohschammer, 
who  writes  as  follows  :^^ — 

*'  Whoso  holds  the  Pope  for  fallible,  can  no 
longer  assert  the  infallibility  of  the  Church.  The 
council  cannot  save  the  infallibility  of  the  Church."'* 
If  it  pronounces  for  the  infallibility  of  the  Pope, 
then  all  the  proofs  against  the  infallibility  of  the 
Pope  turn  to  proofs  against  the  infallibility  of  the 
Church,  for  the  Pope  has  often  erred,  and  he  who 
asserts  the  contrary,  is  in  error.  Then  is  the 
Church  also  no  longer  infallible.  If  from  em- 
barrassment, uncertainty,  or  on  the  ground  of  in- 
opportuneness,  the  Council  pronounces  no  decision 
on  this  matter ;  then  is  the  Pope  left  in  fact  in  the 
exercise  of  that  infalHbility,  which  for  centuries  he 
has  claimed  de  facto,  especially  by  the  recognition  of 
the  Immaculate  Conception  of  the  Blessed  Virgin, 

^2  Since  May  1867,  the  Allgejneine  Zeitung  has  published  upon 
this  inquisitor  several  articles,  which  have  been  duly  appreciated  in 
the  Historisch- Politische  Blatter,  (vol.  Ix.,  p.  854,  seq.),  as  well  as 
in  other  publications. 

^3  "The  right  of  private  conviction,"  p.  96,  seq.     Leipsic,  1869. 

^^  On  the  part  of  Frohschammer,  it  is  not  to  be  wondered  at  if 
he  calls  the  Definition  of  the  8th  December,  1854,  a  "  real  alteration 
of  the  faith  by  a  Papal  Cabinet  order"  {loc.  cit.,  p.  218),  But  what 
shall  we  say  when  Janus  (p.  34,  seq.),  after  he  has  observed  that  a 
few  years  ago  Pius  IX.  declared  the  Immaculate  Conception  of  the 
Blessed  Virgin  a  part  of  divine  revelation  (and  which  declaration 
the  whole  Episcopate  before  and  after  loudly  approved),  points  out 


and  the  New  CoilucH.  245 

the  definition  whereof  by  the  Pope  involves  a  prac- 
tical claim  and  exercise  of  Pontifical  inerrancy."  '^ 
And  in  the  review  of  the  work  of  our  Janus,  the 
same  writer  observes  :'^  "  The  authors  of  this  book 
think  to  help  the  Church  when,  in  the  place  of  the 
gross  Papal  system^  the  episcopal  system  has  been 
set  up.  But  here,  in  our  opinion,  they  are  under 
a  delusion,  and  remain  but  half  way  in  their  course. 
In  the  face  of  tJiis  history  of  the  Papacy,  with  all 
its  forgeries,  pretensions,  errors,  and  immoralities, 
which,  in  conformity  with  the  aim  of  the  popedom, 
must  needs  apply  to  the  whole  Church  and  pene- 
trate it,  it  is  impossible  longer  to  assert  the  infalli- 

that  now  again  (consequently,  as  at  the  former  period)  that  contempt 
for  old  ecclesiastical  tradition,  so  characteristic  of  the  Jesuits,  is  to  be 
pursued  ?  He  who  can  so  speak  evidently  concurs  not  in  the  Papal 
•*  Declaration."  And  yet  the  Council  of  Basle,  in  its  thirty-sixth 
session,  declared,  Doctrinam  de  Immaculata  Conceptione  Deiparae 
Virginis  tanquam  piam,  et  consonam  cultui  ecclesiastico,  fidei 
Catholicae,  rectoe  rationi,  et  S.  Scripturce  ab  omnibus  Cat  hoi  ids  ap- 
probandam,  tenendani  ct  atnplectendam  S.  Synodiis  definit  et  dcclarat. 
Had  the  Council  of  Basle  been  really  CEcumenical,  there  would 
have  been  scarcely  any  need  of  that  much  less  explicit  addition  to 
the  decree  on  original  sin,  which  the  Council  of  Trent,  in  its  sess.  iv., 
issued,  and  whose  fathers  were  moreover  thoroughly  inclined  to  the 
pious  opinion  (z/^V/^  Pallavicin.  Hist.  Cone.  Trid.  ii.,  7  n.,  11-23), 
and  scarcely  still  should  we  have  needed  the  definition  of  1854. 
But  in  what  contradictions  are  not  those  involved,  who,  on  one 
hand,  respect  the  Council  of  Basle  when  it  takes  up  an  attitude 
against  the  Pope  ;  and,  on  the  other  hand,  disregard  it  when  it 
proclaims  a  dogma  sanctioned  likewise  by  the  Pope  !  So  already 
at  Basle  "a  contetnpt  for  the  old  ecclesiastical  tradition''^  was  evinced. 
On  the  matter  itself,  Cf.  Denzinger,  "  Doctrine  of  the  Immaculate 
Conception  of  the  most  Blessed  Virgin  Mary."  Second  ed.,  espe- 
cially p.  30.     Würzburg,  1855. 

^^  Frohschammer  might  even  have  cited  the  words  which  are 
found,  among  other  things,  in  the  Sixth  Lesson  in  the  New  Office  of 
the  8th  December  :  "  Deiparre  ....  in  sua  conceptione  de  teter- 

rimo  humani  generis  hoste   victoriam Pius  IX.,   Pontifex 

Maximus  totius  Ecclesise  votis  annuens  statuit  supremo  suo  atque 
infallibili  oraculo  solemniter  proclamare," 

^^  Allegefneijie  Zeitung,  October  4,  1869.  This  review  has  also  ap- 
peared in  the  shape  of  a  pamphlet,  under  the  title,  "  Appreciation  of 
the  Infallibility  of  the  Pope  and  of  the  Church."  Ackermann,  Munich. 


246  The  Clmrch,  the  Dogma, 

bility  of  the  Church  any  more  than  the  infallibihty 
of  the  Pope.  If  the  Popes,  who  for  centuries  had 
de  facto  deported  themselves  as  the  '  Church/  and 
ruled  that  Church,  are  not  vifallible,  then  is  the 
Church  for  centuries  no  longer  so  ;  for  the  Popes 
arrogated  to  themselves  this  ecclesiastical  iner- 
rancy, exercised  it,  and  even  thereby  abolished  it, 
if  it  ever  existed.  From  the  very  circumstance  that 
this  occurred,  it  follows  that  no  infallibility  was 
imparted  to  the  Church  ;  otherwise  it  would  not 
have  permitted  a  fallible  organ,  the  Pope,  to 
assume  to  himself,  and  even  to  abolish,  this  gift 
of  inerrancy.  What !  a  Church,  wherein  all  hap- 
pened and  could  happen,  which  is  related  to 
us  in  this  book,  should  yet  be  infallible,  could 
and  must,  after  all  this,  pass  as  infallible!  A 
church,  in  which  for  ages  an  all-pervading  system 
of  deceit  and  violence  has  prevailed,  should  then 
have  still  remained  pure  and  inviolate,  '  a  pillar 
and  ground  of  the  truth !'  An  organism  whose  real 
vital  point,  whose  head  and  heart  are  completely 
corrupted,  can  then  still  remain  perfectly  sound  in 
the  other  members !  If  the  extremities  are  attacked 
by  disease,  that  disease  can  be  cured,  and  be  pre- 
vented from  falling  on  the  healthy  organs ;  but  if 
this  disorder  occurs  in  the  central  parts,  then  is  all 
hope  of  the  restoration  of  health  precluded.  It  is 
thus  an  inconsistent  and  vain  endeavour  to  contest 
the  infallibility  of  the  Pope  with  the  utmost  logical 
acumen,  and  yet  to  assert  the  infallibility  of  the 
Church  herself;  as  this  prerogative  we  ascribe  to 
the  Episcopate,  to  the  bishops  assembled  in  gene- 
ral council.  A  warm  controversy  must  then  im- 
mediately ensue,  as  to  what  councils  are  really 
oecumenical,  and  what  not;  for  this  is  by  no  means 
fixed  with  certainty.'^    And  if,  as  our  pamphlet  has 

^'^  We  saw  above  (chapter  ix.)  that,  in  Janus  at  least,  this  is  a 
matter  of  great  uncertainty. 


and  the  Nczu  CoiniciL  247 

often  pointed  out,  earlier  councils,  that  passed  for 
general,  showed  themselves  as  only  the  pliant 
instruments  of  Popes  ruling  with  absolute  power  ; 
where  was  then  the  infallibility  of  the  Church,  if 
the  all-ruling  Pontiff  were  not  infallible,  and  the 
Church  were  obliged  to  obey  the  fallible  Pope  and 
his  misused  instruments,  the  flexible  bishops.  This 
resting  Jialf-zvay,  this  inconsistency,  is  the  weak  side 
of  the  work  in  question,  and  the  chief  obstacle  to 
its  exercising  a  great  influence,  whether  in  regard  to 
the  representatives  of  faith,  or  to  those  of  science." 
And  further  on  this  writer  urges,  "■  If  the  impend- 
ing CEcumenical  Council  really  pronounces  the 
infallibility  of  the  Pope  to  be  a  dogma,  then  must 
the  authors  of  Janus  acknowledge  that  even  the 
Church  (namely,  the  Episcopate)  can  err ;  for  it 
declares  that  to  be  a  truth,  which  yet  by  all  kinds 
of  proof  can  be  shown  to  be  an  error.  All  the 
facts  which  they  have  brought  forward  against 
Papal  infallibility,  all  the  assertions  which  they 
have  set  forth  against  it,  then,  witness  against  the 
infallibility  of  the  Church  herself;  for  the  Church 
in  that  case  pronounces  dogmatically,  and  yet 
erroneously,  that  the  Pope  has  never  erred,  never 
could  have  erred  ;  and  not  merely  that  from  hence- 
forth he  will  no  longer  err.  Then  our  authors 
must  either  confess  that  all  the  historical  facts 
which  they  have  investigated  and  set  forth  are  not 
real,  but  even  fabricated ;  or  that  they  all  do  not 
signify  what  they  yet  clearly  attest  to  every  unpre- 
judiced mind  ;  or  in  conformity  with  the  truth  and 
the  needs  of  the  time,  they  must  give  up  the  in- 
fallibility of  the  Church  also  (taking  that  word  in 
the  usual  dogmatic  sense),  for  whose  impractica- 
bility, besides,  special  proofs  might  yet  be  adduced 
in  abundance.  No  other  alternative  appears  to 
me  possible/'  A  like  conclusion  another  theolo- 
gian likewise  must  submit  to,  who  in  the  same  way 


248  The  Churchy  the  Dogma, 

ascribes  infallibility  to  the  Episcopate  united  with 
the  Pope,  but  apprehends,  however,  a  catastrophe, 
in  case  this  Episcopate,  by  virtue  of  its  unerring 
decree,  should  adjudge  to  the  Pope,  as  supreme 
executive  organ  of  the  Church,  the  prerogative  of 
inerrancy  also.'^ 

It  would  be  more  consistent  to  carry  out  the 
historical  view,  and  to  flatter  the  spirit  of  the  age, 
by  representing  the  ''  original  rights  of  the  congre- 
gations" as  having  soon  passed  over  to  the  priests, 
the  rights  of  the  priests  as  having  been  absorbed 
by  the  bishops,  and  those  of  the  bishops  by  the 
Pope/^  Here  we  should  have  a  progression  from 
Democracy  to  Aristocracy,  and  from  the  latter  to 
Monarchy,  and  a  better  justification  for  those  who 
wish  to  descend  from  Monarchy  to  Aristocracy,  in 
order  by  this  again  to  reach  the  Oligarchical,  and 
then  the  Ochlocratic  Democracy.  Outside  the 
Catholic  Church,  and  far  from  the  Papal  system, 
whose  antiquity  reaches  much  beyond  those  mod- 
ern views  and  hypotheses,  mankind  have  had  in 
this  respect  a  very  large  experience.  '^  It  is  a 
very  sloping  path,"  says  Dr  Dollinger,  ''  on  which 
religious  communities  have  in  this  respect  gone 
down.  First  the  Byzantines  cried  out,  '  We  shall 
have  only  patriarchs,  whereof  each  shall  govern  a 
portion  of  the  Church ;  but  no  Pope,  no  head  of 
patriarchs.'  Then  came  the  Anglican  Church,  and 
said,  '  We  shall  have  neither  Pope  nor  patriarch, 
but  merely  bishops.'  On  their  side  the  Protestants 
of  the  continent  declared,  '  We  shall  have  no 
bishops,  but  merely  pastors,   and  over  them  the 

^^  Allgemeine  Zeitung,  8th  October,  on  the  in  other  respects  more 
cautious  pamphlet,  entitled,  "  Reform  of  the  Roman  Church  in 
Head  and  Members.  Task  of  the  Impending  Council."  Dunker, 
Leipsic,  1869. 

■^'^  Frohschammer,  loc,  ciL,  p.  217. 


and  the  New  Coimcil.  249 

princes  of  the  land.'  Later  came  forward  the  new 
Protestant  sects  in  England  and  in  other  countries 
with  the  declaration,  *  We  need  no  pastors,  but 
only  preachers.'  At  last  appeared  the  *  Friends' 
or  Quakers,  and  several  new  religious  bodies,  who 
made  the  discovery  that  even  preachers  are  an 
evil,  and  that  each  one  must  be  his  own  prophet, 
preacher,  and  priest.  How  to  advance  a  step  far- 
ther below  has  hitherto  baffled  all  attempts ;  yet 
in  the  United  States,  it  would  appear,  a  solution  of 
the  difficulty  is  already  sought  for."^°  Female 
preachers,  however,  have  been  there  already  estab- 
lished, and  found  hearers 

Thus  evermore  evaporates  not  merely  the  hier- 
archy, but  every  ecclesiastical  office  whose  estab- 
lishment Protestants,  who  still  have  retained  some 
positive  belief,  at  present  earnestly  strive  after.  But 
notmerelydoth  the  hierarchy,not  merelythe  clerical 
office,  and  every  kind  of  spiritual  inagisteriiini  and 
viinistcriuin  disappear,  but  even  dogma  itself,  whose 
very  name  has  become  odious  to  a  portion  of  Pro- 
testants. This  party  will  hear  nothing  more  of 
symbolical  books,  of  rigid  dogmatic  systems ;  it 
recognizes  no  more  the  doctrinal,  but  at  most  only 
the  historical  Christ ;  it  admits  at  most  a  changing, 
fluctuating,  but  no  immutable  and  ever  steadfast 
doctrine.^'  It  still  tolerates  Christianity,  but  such 
a  Christianity  only  as  will  accommodate  itself  to 
the  "  genius  of  the  age,'"'  which  will  submit  to  all 
the  transformations,  and  the  arts  of  toilette,  that 
the  fashionable  heroes  of  the  day  deem  indispens- 
able for  its  decorous  entry  into  modern  society. 

Yet   even   the  Catholic    Church,  we   are   told, 

20  "  Church  and  Churches,"  p.  31. 

-^  See,  for  example,  the  deliberations  of  the  third  meeting  of  Ger- 
man Protestants  at  Bremen.  Allgemeine  Zeitungy  nth  June  1868. 
Append. 


250  TJic  Church,  the  Dogma, 

"viakcs  nezu  dogmas,  and  the  old  Canon  of  St  Vin- 
cent of  Lerins,  '  quod  semper^  quod  ubiquc,  quod  ab 
oniJiibiis  credituin  est,'  is  set  aside,  and  the  adher- 
ence to  the  ancient  tradition,  and  to  the  Church  of 
the  first  six  centuries,  is  broken  through"  (p.  46). 
But  against  this  assumption  CathoHc  theologians 
protest,  who  unanimously  assert  that  the  Church 
never  makes  new  dogmas,  and  that  she  has  no  in- 
spiration.^^ The  substance  of  Faith  remains  the 
same ;  but  much  in  the  lapse  of  ages  is  formally 
and  logically  developed,^^  and  set  forth  in  greater 
clearness,  especially  when  any  opposition  has  been 
made  to  a  doctrine.^"^  The  Canon  of  Vincent  Lerins 
is  not  merely  to  be  understood  of  what  is  to  be 
believed  explicitly ;  he,  like  other  ecclesiastical 
authors,  expressly  assumes  a  progress  even  in  mat- 
ters of  Faith. "^  ''  In  the  simple  beginnings  of 
Christianity,"  says  Dr  DöUinger,  "  lie  energies  and 
germs  of  a  civilization,  which  in  its  universal  des- 
tination for  all  mankind,  is  still,  after  eisfhteen 
centuries,  ever  in  a  state  of  progress  and  perpetual 
growth  ;  there  lies  a  wealth  of  creative  ideas,  a 
fulness  of  new  formations  in  Church,  State,  art, 
science,  and  manners,  which,  so  far  from  being 
exhausted,  will,  in  future  times,  bring  forth  sciences 

"  Dieringer  upon  Lianno's  Work  in  the  Journal  of  Theological 
Literature,  p.  830,      Bonn.  1S69. 

"■*  S.  Thorn.  Sum.  Theol.,  2.  2.  q,  I.  a.  7. 

-^  S.  Aug.  Enarr.  in  Ps.  55,  n.  22. 

-^  Commonit.  c.  28  :  Nullusne  ergo  in  Ecclesia  Christi  profectus 
habebitur  religionis  ?  Habeatur  plane  et  maximus.  Nam  quis  ille 
est  tarn  invidus  hominibus,  tarn  exosus  Deo,  qui  istud  prohibere 
conetur?  Sed  ita  tamen,  ut  \q.x&  profectus  sit  xV^tfidei,  non  permu- 
tatio.  Siquidem  ad  profectum  pertinet,  ut  in  semetipsatn  unaquaeque 
res  amplificetur,  ad  permutationem  vero,  ut  aliquid  ex  alio  in  aliud 
transvertatur.  Crescat  igitur  oportet  et  multum  vehementerque 
proficiat  tam  singulorum,  quam  omnium,  tarn  unius  hominis  quam 
totius  Ecclesiae,  eetatum  ac  sseculorum  gradibus,  intelligentia, 
scientia,  sapientia,  sed  in  suo  dumtaxat  genere,  in  eodem  sciHcet  dog- 
mate,  eodem  sensu  eademque  sententia. 


and  the  New  Council. 


2=;i 


and  institutions,  that  we  are  yet  scarcely  able  to 
dream  of."^^  What  applies  to  Christianity  in  gen- 
eral, applies  more  especially  to  dogma  ;  and  true 
is  the  word  of  the  great  Pope  Gregory  :  "  The  more 
the  world  draws  near  to  its  end,  the  more  lavishly 
will  the  stores  of  eternal  science  be  opened  unto 
us."^^  Particular  dogmas  must,  in  the  course  of 
ages,  undergo  no  change,  no  mutilation,  no  dis- 
figurement, but  receive  a  more  precise  expression, 
a  more  suitable  formulisation,  a  development  set- 
ting forth  all  the  consequences  involved  in  them  ; 
they  must,  according  to  Vincent  Lerins,  receive 
evidentiam,  lucem,  distinctionem — evidence,  light, 
discrimination  ;  but  they  must  preserve  also  what 
they  intrinsically  possess ;  plenitudinem,  integri- 
tatem,  proprietatem — their  fulness,  their  integrity, 
their  peculiarity.^^  By  means  of  a  natural  process 
of  development,  a  religious  truth  can  come  out  at 
one  time,  or  in  one  place,  more  definite,  more  clear, 
more  universal,  than  at  other  times,  or  in  other 
places.^^  A  new  expression  of  an  ancient  truth 
the  Church  was  often  necessitated  to  put  forth  ;  and 
it  was  only  heresy,  which  felt  itself  affected  thereby, 
that  opposed  this  expression  ;  whilst  it  otherwise 
indulged  in  the  most  unauthorised  innovations.^" 
Propositions  entirely  new,  in  former  times  utterly 
and  universally  unknown,  can  never  become  articles 

"*  Döllinger's  "Christianity  and  the  Church."  Preface,  p.  i. 
(German. ) 

'•^  Greg.  M.  homil.  xvi.  in  Ezech. 

'^  Commonit.  c.  23. 

^  Bossiiet  Reponse  ä  M,  Leibnitz  20  Janv.  1 700,  n.  15  (CEuvres, 
t.  xiv.,  p.  475,  p.  II,  n  30).  Pour  elre  constante  et  perpctuelle  la 
verite  Catholique  ne  laisse  pas  d'avoir  ses  progres  ;  eile  est,  comme 
en  un  lieu  plus  que  dans  un  autre,  en  un  temps  plus  que  dans  un  autre, 
plus  clairement,  plus  distinctement,  plus  universellement  connue. 

2"  Hilar.  Lib.  contra  Constant,  n.  16  :  In  uno  novitas  eligitur,  in 
alio  submovetur.  Ubi  impietatis  occasio  patet,  novitas  admittitur  ; 
ubi  autem  religionis  maxima  et  sola  cautela  est,  excluditur. 


252  The  Church,  the  Dogma, 

of  faith ;  but  such  propositions  may  become  so,  as 
have  experienced  manifold  contradiction  from  indi- 
vidual doctors,  even  though  they  were  numerous. 
Before  the  first  Council  of  Nicaea,  there  were  men 
who  did  not  acknowledge  the  consubstantiality  of 
the  Father  and  the  Son  ;  there  were  before  the 
synods  of  Ephesus  and  Chalcedon,  such  as  enter- 
tained very  unclear  notions  of  the  Person  of  Christ, 
and  had  difficulties  about  the  one  Person  or  the 
two  Natures  ;  there  were  before  the  Fourth  Lateran 
Council  those  who  took  offence  at  the  word  Tran- 
substantiation.  The  Church's  doctrine  on  Justifi- 
cation and  on  the  Sacraments  was  not  formerly  set 
forth  with  that  perfect  lucidity,  as  has  been  the  case 
since  the  Council  of  Trent ;  and  even  the  doctrine 
of  the  Primacy  of  the  Bishop  of  Rome,  was  more 
preciselyformulizedatthe  General  Council  of  Lyons 
in  1274,  and  at  that  of  Florence  in  1439.  This 
doctrine,  especially,  respecting  the  headship  of  the 
Supreme  pastor  of  the  Church,  was,  on  many  occa- 
sions, more  definitely  put  forth,  at  other  times  less 
prominently  so.  We  find  it  in  different  places 
likewise  not  developed  with  the  like  clearness ;  for 
where  centrifugal  movements  more  easily  expanded, 
there  the  importance  of  the  centre  was  in  many 
ways  undervalued.  But  the  doctrine  of  the  supre- 
macy of  the  Bishop  of  Rome,  as  successor  of  St 
Peter,  was  ever  firmly  fixed  in  the  Church,  and  no 
assault  on  that  doctrine  could  ever  prevail.^^  A 
growth  in  the  knowledge  of  this  article,  also,  is 
apparent  in  the  history  of  dogmas.  Here,  too,  we 
see  that  progress  stated  by  Vincent  of  Lerins,  just 

^^  Paschalis  ii.  ep.  6  ad  Archiep.  Polon  (Hard.  vi.  ii.  p.  1770). 
Numquid  hsec  nos  commodi  nostri  professione  requirimus,  et  non 
unitatis  Catholicae  statuimus  firmamentum  ?  Possunt  Apostolicam 
sedem  contemnere,  possunt  adversum  nos  calcaneum  elevare  ;  datum 
a  Deo  Privilegium  evertere  vel  auferre  non  possunt,  quo  Petro  dictum 
est :  Tu  es  Petrus  et  super  hancpetram  aedificabo  Ecclesiam  meam. 


and  the  Nczu  Council.  253 

as  we  are  able  to  trace  it  from  the  simple  Apostolic 
Creed,  down  to  the  Symbols  of  Nicrea  and  Con- 
stantinople, with  the  addition  Filioquc ;  and  thence 
again  down  to  the  Tridentine  Confession  of  Faith, 
proposed  by  Pius  IV.,  and  which  even  Janus  holds 
to  be  obligatory  (p.  93).  In  this  all  theologians 
agree,  that  much  for  a  long  time  lay  more  obscurely 
hid  in  the  consciousness  of  the  Church,  which  was 
afterwards  more  clearly  enunciated,  and  brought  to 
the  fuller  apprehension  of  all,  and  thus  became  the 
subject  of  \.\v^  fides  cxplicita?~ 

As,  then,  regards  ancient  tradition,  there  are  two 
sorts  of  things  :  the  tradition  itself,  and  the  written 
testimonies  forthat  tradition.  In  the  Paradosis,  or 
Tradition,  of  the  Church,  much  lived  before  it  was 
committed  to  writing  ;  and  this  fact  is  attested  by 
the  Fathers.^^  We  must  not  with  Febronius  think 
that  it  is  the  first  six  centuries  that  are  alone 
authoritative,  for  this  is  repugnant  to  all  the  prin- 
ciples of  faith,  and  is  tantamount  to  saying,  that 
Christ  has  abided  with  His  Church  only  down  to 
the  year  600.  ^'^  Whoso  in  the  fifth  century  would 
have  said,  "  The  Apostolic  Fathers,  and  at  most 
Justin  and  Irenseus,  I  let  pass  as  witnesses,  but  not 
the  subsequent  ones,"  would  have  excited  the  ab- 
horrence of  the  whole  Church.  Augustine  cited 
as  authorities  Fathers  of  the  fourth  century,  and 
even  such  as  had  been  his  contemporaries.^^  He 
who,  in  the  sixth  century,  would  have  rejected 
Augustine,  Ambrose,  Leo  ;  or  any  other  of  the 
Fathers,  who  were  cited  in'  the  epistle  of  the 
Em.peror  Justinian,  read  in  the  first  session  of  the 


^■^  Kilber  in  Theol.  Wirceb.  Tract,  iv.  c.  2.  a.  4.  n.  102,  scq.  iir. 
•*3  Iren.  adv.  hasr.  iii.  1-4.     Basil  de  Spir.  S.,  n.  66,   75,  L.  ii. 
adv.  Eiinom.,  n.  8. 

=*•*  De  Statu  Eccl,  c.  2,  §  i,  se<]. 
'^^  Aug.  c.  Julian,  L.  i,  n.  3,  scq. 


2  54  '^^^<^  CJmrch,  the  Dogma, 

Council  of  553,^^  would  have  been  regarded  as  a 
contemner  of  the  Church's  doctrine.  He  who,  in 
the  thirteenth  century,  would  not  have  allowed  a 
Peter  Damiani,  or  an  Anselm  of  Canterbury,  to 
stand  as  witnesses  of  the  Church's  teaching,  would 
have  experienced  the  like  fate.  Those,  too,  were 
regarded  in  the  same  light,  who,  in  the  sixteenth 
century,  despised  the  unanimous  teaching  of  the 
ecclesiastical  schools.^^  It  was  not  otherwise  with 
the  later  Greeks,  who  looked  on  the  patriarchs 
Germanus,  Tarasius,  Nicephorus,  and  Theodore 
the  Studite,  as  celebrated  witnesses  and  teachers, 
although  belonging  only  to  the  eighth  and  ninth 
centuries,  and  whose  Councils  of  the  years  T156 
and  1 166  cited  as  witnesses  the  later  as  well  as  the 
earlier  doctors.  ^^  The  question  at  issue  is  not, 
whether  all  proofs  be  valid,  whether  all  documents 
be  authentic,  bnt  as  to  what  has  been  believed  and 
publicly  tangJit  in  the  Chnrch.  At  all  times  it  has 
been  deemed  rash  to  stigmatize  doctrines  not  dis- 
approved by  the  Church,  and  held  by  authorized 
doctors  ;  and  it  was  for  this  reason  that  the  twenty- 
ninth  proposition,  among  those  censured  by  Pope 
Alexander  VIII.  on  the  7th  December  1690,  was 
deemed  reprehensible.^^  The  consent  of  the  Fa- 
thers was  in  questions  of  faith  and  of  morals  ever 
decisive  ;  but  not  the  opinions  of  individual  doctors, 
who  might  easily  give  in  to  one-sided  and  exag- 
gerated views,  as,  for  example,  was  the  case  with 
Agostino  Trionfo  (p.  230).  The  individual  teacher 
has  authority  only  through  the  Church  ;  a  man, 
ever  so  able  and  learned,  but  whose  doctrine  was 


36  Hefele,  Cone,  ii.,  841. 
^''  Canus  de  loc.  theol.,  L.  viii.,  c.  I. 

3^  Mai  Spicil.  Rom.  x.,  p.  1-93.     Script.  Vet.  Nova  Coll.  iv., 
p.  1-96. 

•^'■*  DenzmgerY.Xi<^\\x.,Y.  345,  n.  11S6. 


and  the  New  Ccmncil.  255 

rejected  by  the  Church,  never  could,  nor  ouc^ht  to  be, 
considered  in  the  same  light  with  others  as  a  witness, 
and  a  doctor  or  teacher.'^"  The  Church  herself  was 
not  misled  by  the  apostasy  of  a  Tertullian  and  of 
other  great  minds.  The  principles  of  the  faith  are 
so  great  and  exalted,  that  a  theologian  who,  after 
long  years  of  study,  explains  and  sets  them  forth, 
should  approach  his  work  only  with  a  holy  fear, 
should  needs  be  modest  and  humble,  and  often 
mistrust  himself  whether  he  be  capable  of  worthily 
defending  those  principles,  or  of  adequately  repel- 
ling the  attacks  of  opponents,  ever  convinced  that 
if  he  does  not  succeed,  others  will  be  enabled  to 
execute  the  task  in  a  manner  better,  more  con- 
vincing, more  scientific,  especially  as  Providence 
often  raises  up  later  than  men  expected  the  right 
men  for  the  right  act. 

We  live  in  a  period  of  transition  to  a  new  stage 
of  development ;  we  see  men  and  times  quickly 
and  unexpectedly  change.  A  diseased  society  is 
wont  to  repel  the  salutary  remedies  unsuited  to  its 
taste ;  the  carnal  man,  engrossed  with  material 
objects,  apprehends  not  the  things  of  God  ;  and  a 
later  generation  has  often  looked  with  compas- 
sionate surprise  on  those  that  went  before.  In  the 
fifth  century  the  wonderful  epistle  of  the  great 
Pope  Leo  to  Flavian  was  violently  attacked 
throughout  whole  provinces  of  the  Church,  and  in 
entire  countries  ;  now  it  beams  in  full  lustre  as 
a  splendid  dogmatic  masterpiece.  What  if  one 
day  posterity  should  find  in  one  or  other  proposi- 
tion of  the  dreaded  syllabus,  or  in  a  Papal  bull 
promulgated  in  the  new  Council,  a  beacon  of  light, 
or  an  anchor  of  safety  !     The  present  Titanic  race, 

*"  Vincent,  Lir.  loc  cit.,  c.  23  :  Ut  omnes  vere  Catholici  nove- 
rint,  se  cum  Ecclesia  doctores  recipere,  non  cum  doctoribus  Ecclesire 
fidem  deserere  debere. 


256  The  Church,  the  Dogma, 

however,  is  unable  to  conceive  this ;  it  is  Hke  to 
the  contemporaries  of  Noah  at  the  building  of  the 
ark ;  it  rejects  all  which  it  has  not  achieved  by  its 
own  energy,  and  by  its  own  act. 

What !  Papal  bulls  again  !  Of  these  we  surely 
have  had  an  overflow,  and  Janus  has  marred  our 
taste  for  them.  Let  us  see  only  what  he  makes 
out  of  the  bull  of  Paul  IV.,  "  Cum  ex  Apostolatus 
officio"  (p.  382).  This  bull  was  issued  at  a  time"^"  at 
which,  in  all  countries,  even  in  those  under  Spanish 
sway,  Catholicism  was  grievously  menaced,  and 
had  to  defend  itself  to  the  last  extremity.  Its 
immediate  object  was  to  renew  the  old  ecclesias- 
tical penalties  against  schismatics  and  heretics. 
It  rested  entirely  upon  that  principle  of  public  law 
then,  still  generally  prevalent  in  Catholic  countries, 
whereby  schismatics  and  heretics  were  regarded 
as  guilty  of  a  most  grievous  crime,  and  were  con- 
sequently incapacitated  for  public  offices,  as  well 
as  for  the  functions  of  governmient ;  and  if  its 
penal  enactments  affected  the  highest  ecclesiasti- 
cal as  well  as  the  highest  secular  functionaries, 
even  kings  and  emperors  themselves,  so  this 
clause  is  found  in  the  decrees  of  the  Council  of 

Constance,  which,    nevertheless,  is   of   such   hisfh 

•  /I 

authority  with  Janus."^^     Moreover,  this  bull  can 

in  no  way  be  characterised  as  a  dogmatic  or  ex 

cathedra  one  ;  it  is  a  mere  penal  law,  founded  on 

the  then  prevalent  principle  of  ecclesiastical  and 

^^  Pauli  IV.,  Const.  19,  lib.  vii.,  c.  9,  de  hgsr,  v.  3.  Raynaldus 
(anno.  1559,  n.  14)  gives  in  full  the  first  half  of  this  bull.  Janus 
(p.  383)  takes  everything  in  a  strictly  literal  sense,  as,  for  example, 
when  he  makes  the  Pope  say  that  those  converted  from  heresy  are 
to  be  shut  up  in  a  monastery,  "  there  to  do  penance  for  the  rest  of 
their  lives  on  bread  and  ivaterP  But  the  words,  in  pane  doloris  et 
aqua  moestitiffi,  are  figurative  expressions  taken  from  Scripture. 

■^■^  Cone.  Const.  Sess.  xiii.,  xiv.,  xvii.,  xx.,  xxxvii.     Bianchi,  t.  i. 
1.  i.  §  19,  p.  164,  scq. 


and  the  Nczu  Council.  257 

secular  jurisprudence,  which  as  yet  was  in  no 
CathoHc  country  given  up,  and  was  quite  ana- 
logous to  the  constitutions  of  Paul  III.  against 
Henry  VIII./^  of  Pius  V.  against  Elizabeth,^^  and 
of  Sixtus  V.  against  Henry  IV.  of  France."^^  ^The 
same  observation  applies  to  the  bull  In  Ccena  Do- 
■mini,  depicted  in  such  fearful  colours  by  Janus 
(p.  385),  but  which,  since  the  year  1770,  is  no  longer, 
as  formerly,  read  out  on  Maundy  Thursday.^*^  It 
is  an  old  complaint  of  the  "  Ultramontanes,"  that 
their  opponents  have  two  weights  and  measures, 
that  they  pay  very  accurate  attention  to  all  the 
relations  of  time,  persons,  and  circumstances,  when 
they  have  anything  to  justify  or  to  palliate,  but 
not  so  when  they  are  about  to  pronounce  damna- 
tory judgments  ;  that  they  then  exclusively  apply 
to  the  characters  and  acts  of  earlier  times,  the  ob- 
jects of  their  detestation,  the  modern  standard  as 
alone  valid.'*^  Whoever,  besides,  will  carefully 
study  the  Bullarium  of  modern  times,  will  soon 
convince  himself  that  the  Apostolic  See,  with  all 
its  tenacious  adherence  to  the  principles  of  the 
Church,  knows  how  to  take  into  account  the  ne- 
cessities of  the  times.  Wherefore  have  those,  who 
have  so  officiously  busied  themselves  with  the  im- 
pending Council,  scarcely  paid  any  attention  to 
the  Bull  of  Indiction,  which  certainly,  however, 
was  the  first  thing  to  be  considered  ? 

^  Spondan.,  a.  1535,  n.  15  ;  a.  1538,  n.  14.  Bianchi,  t.  ii.,  I 
vi.,  §  10,  n.  2,  scq.     Gosselin,  t.  ii.,  c.  3,  a.  I,  §  2,  p.  276,  seq. 

•"  Const.  loi.  Spondan.,  a.  1570,  n.  3,  4.  Bianchi,  1.  c,  n.4, 
Gosselin,  1.  c,  p.  280,  seq. 

•^  Bianchi,  1,  c,  n.  5.     Gosselin,  1.  c,  p.  2S8,  seq. 

46  Bened.  XIV.,  de  Syn.  dioec,  1.  ix.,  c.  4,  n.  5,  seq.  Liguori 
Theol.  Moral.,  1.  vii.,  n.  83.  Bennettis,  p.  ii.,  t.  iii.,  p.  524.  |Dr  Den- 
zinger,  in  the  Catholic  weekly  paper  of  Würzburg,  5th  May  1S55 
n.  18.  Theiner  Histoire  du  Pontificat  de  Clement  XIV.,  vol.  i.,  p 
480,  seq.;  vol.  ii.,  pp.  52,  53,  55. 

■*"  The  strict  Roman  theologians,  and  especially  the  Roman  clergy 

R 


258  The  Chttrch,  the  Dogma, 

A  movement,  nay,  a  concussion  of  minds,  was, 
under  the  circumstances  of  the  times,  to  be  ex- 
pected on  the  announcement  of  a  General  Council. 
That  movement  may  be  wild  and  tempestuous  ;  it 
is  still  better  than  a  dead  stagnation.  We  stand 
on  the  eve  of  a  momentous  event.  But  who  could 
have  conceived  it  possible  that  this  most  magnani- 
mous act  should  have  been  treated  almost  as  a 
crime  .'*  The  ruling  Pope,  Pius  IX.,  whom  all  that 
know  him  must  love  and  revere,  whose  conduct 
has  been  righteous,  noble,  and  lofty,  but  who,  in 
the  opinion  of  our  Janus,  is  nothing  more  than  a 
small,  very  small,  successor  of  Innocent  III.  (p. 
24) — an  opinion  which  we  abandon  to  the  judg- 
ment of  posterity — has,  from  a  free  impulse,  and 
guided  by  the  best  intentions,  summoned  an  CEcu- 
menical  Council ;  and  for  this  act  the  numerous 
bishops  assembled  from  all  parts  of  the  world  at 
the  jubilee  of  St  Peter's  martyrdom  in  1867,  as 
afterwards  their  colleagues  not  then  present  in 
Rome,  tendered  their  solemn  thanks  to  the  Father 
of  Christendom  for  his  resolution,  and  required  the 
faithful,  in  instructive,  edifying,  and  enthusiastic  ad- 
dresses, to  prepare  themselves  in  spirit  for  the  cele- 
bration of  this  momentous  and  most  salutary  event. 
Even  this  first  act,  the  mere  convocation  of  the 

are  (in  Janus,  p.  201)  accused  of  a  deficiency  in  theological  science, 
of  the  use  of  spurious  documents,  and  of  ignorance  in  liistory.  But 
with  their  opponents  it  is  quite  otherwise,  even  when  they  make 
use  of  spurious  passages  in  a  like  degree,  and  are  still  more  ignor- 
ant in  theology  and  in  history,  as,  for  example,  the  Spaniard  Andrew 
Escobar,  whose  "  Gubernaculum  Conciliorum"  teems  with  errors. 
(Cf.  Bennettis,  p.  1.,  t.  i.,  p.  321,  seq^  This  Escobar  (p.  380)  and 
Alphonsus  Tostatus,  who  from  a  spirit  of  revenge  against  Pope 
Eugenius  IV.,  who  had  censured  some  of  his  propositions  (see 
Spondanus,  anno.  1447),  combated  the  doctrine  formerly  defended 
by  himself,  for  example,  in  his  Com.  in  Matth.,  c.  16  ;  these  two 
writers  are  adduced  as  proofs,  that  the  most  distinguished  Spanish 
theologians  advocated,  before  the  tyranny  of  the  Inquisition,  the 
theory  patronised  by  Janus. 


ajid  the  Nciu  Council .  259 

synod,  is  in  itself,  and  independently  of  the  results, 
a  splendid  achievement  of  the  Pope.  "  The  iso- 
lation," says  the  venerable  Bishop  of  Nismes,'''^ 
*'  and  the  state  of  material  impotence  to  which 
events  have  reduced  the  pontiff,  as  well  as  the 
excitement  which  he  foresaw  he  would  call  forth 
in  certain  social  spheres,  have  not  deterred  him 
from  this  act  of  duty.  Doubly  strong,  as  well  by 
internal  illumination  as  by  the  warm  sympathy 
with  which  the  bishops  concurred  in  his  design, 
when  he  communicated  it  to  them,  he  has  pro- 
ceeded with  that  calm  intrepidity  which,  from  the 
beginning,  has  characterized  all  the  important  acts 
of  his  pontificate  to  its  realization.  This  unex- 
pected manifestation  of  his  authority  has  been 
hailed  by  homage  of  every  kind.  Some  have  hon- 
oured him  by  their  stupefaction  ;  others  by  the 
most  singular  apprehensions.  Several  even  of 
those,  who  have  never  been  devoted  friends  of 
Rome,  have  publicly  offered  to  him  the  tribute 
of  their  admiration  ;  and  certainly  no  one  can  for- 
get the  words  spoken  on  that  occasion  in  the 
legislative  chamber  by  an  orator,  in  whom  poli- 
tical errors  have  not  been  able  to  efface  the  feeling 
and  the  respect  for  all  that  is  great  and  noble."^^ 
'  There  is  in  this  act,'  says  he,  '  a  boldness  and 
an  elevation,  which  fill  me  with  respect  and  admir- 
ation ;  for  I  love  the  strong  powers  that  confide 
in  themselves,  and  fearlessly  and  with  determina- 
tion manifest  and  unfold  the  faith  that  animates 
them.     This  is  an  ennobling  spectacle.' " 

Joyously  did  the  supreme  pastors  gather  round 
the  apostolic  chair,  obeying  the  call  of  their  chief 


^5  Mgr.    Plantier  on   General  Councils,   xxix.     German    Trans- 
lation, pp.  74,  75.     Freiburg,  1S69. 

^  Emile  Ollivier,  in  the  sitting  of  the  loth  July  1868. 


2  6o  The  CImrch,  the  Dogma, 

not  willingly  only,  but  with  enthusiasm.  Pius  IX. 
knows  full  well,  indeed,  what  his  illustrious  pre- 
decessor Sixtus  III.  once  declared — ''  There  is  no 
body  which  is  not  governed  by  the  head.  But  as 
every  body  is  governed  by  the  head,  so  the  head 
itself,  when  not  borne  up  and  upheld  by  its  body, 
loses  its  firmness  and  its  power,  and  no  longer  main- 
tains the  dignity  which  it  before  possessed." ^°  The 
present  Pontiff,  and  those  around  him,  know  full 
well  what  Benedict  XIV.,^^  together  with  so  many 
theologians  and  canonists,^^  says,  "that  bishops  in 
an  Oecumenical  Synod  are  not  merely  counsellors, 
but  real  judges  also.  The  primacy  and  the  epis- 
copate form  inseparable  parts  of  one  whole  ;  they 
are  most  closely  bound  together."  In  no  age  more 
than  in  our  own  has  this  been  so  practically 
evinced  ;  and  practically  many  questions  admit  of 
a  simple  and  easy  solution,  which  theoretically, 
especially  in  consequence  of  the  confusion  into 
which  they  have  been  thrown  by  different  scholars, 
appear  very  complicated.  It  will  be,  as  the  above- 
named  French  prelate  declares,  proved  in  a  bril- 
liant and  victorious  manner  in  the  Council,  nay, 
made  evident  even  to  the  blind,  that  in  the  body 
of  the  Church  head  and  hands  have  but  one  life 
— but  one  and  the  same  thought.^^ 

The  respect  and  reverence  which  we  owe  to  the 
Catholic  Episcopate,  will  in  no  way  permit  us  to 
examine  the  insinuations  that  our  bishops  at  the 
approaching  Council  will  be  reduced  to  a  position 
of  utter  servitude,  and  be  incapable  of  giving 
expression  to  their  own  opinions.     The  worst  and 

^"  Ep.  lo  ad  Episc.     Illyr.  n.  4. 
^^  De  Syn.  dioeces.     L.  xiii.,  c.  2,  n.  2. 

^^  Many  authors  are  cited  by  Zaccaria,    also  (Antifebronio  t.  I. 
Diss.  II.,  c.  4,  p.  140). 

^3  Mgr.  Plantier,  §  xliii.,  p.  113. 


and  the  Nrd)  Coitncil.  261 

most  insolent  invectives,  as  they  appeared  in  the 
Fourth  and  Fifth  Articles  (namely,  in  the  73d  and 
74th  numbers  of  the  Allgemeine  Zeitung),  have 
not  been  admitted  into  the  new  edition  ;  but  they 
are  still  not  formally  disavowed,  not  retracted, 
and  are  presupposed,  or  implicitly  contained,  in 
the  effusions  of  our  Janus.  With  indignation  and 
disgust,  every  Catholic  deserving  of  the  name 
repels  the  outrage  offered  in  those  articles  to  the 
Episcopate,  but  not  less  so  the  excuse,  equivalent 
to  the  severest  accusation,  to  wit,  that  "  we  should 
not,  and  ought  not,  to  hold  these  men  responsible 
for  decrees  and  for  omissions,  which  depejid  not 
upon  tJiemy 

Our  historian  has  here  become  a  prophet  too  ; 
he  predicts  the  non-submission  to  the  new  Council. 
"  The  new  Council  can  never  be  a  really  free  one, 
and,  therefore,  theologians  and  canonists  must  be 
corrected,  who  have  held  that,  without  complete 
freedom,  the  decisions  of  a  council  are  not  bind- 
ing" (p.  425).  ''The  newly-announced  Council 
will  be  held  not  in  Italy  only  (and  this  would  be 
already  frightful  enough,  in  despite  of  the  Govern- 
ment of  Victor  Emmanuel  working  for  the  *  Free 
Church,'  especially  from  the  excessive  number  of 
Italian  bishops^^),  but  also  (and  this  is  most  awful, 
though  others  know  at  present  no  freer  spot  in  the 
Old  World),  the  Council,  we  say,  will  be  held  in 
Rome  itself,  and  it  is  already  announced  (by 
whom  ?)  that,  as  the  sixth  Latei'an  Coiincil,  it  will 
faithfully  attach  itself  to  the  fifth.  Thereby  all  is 
said"  (p.  369,  Ger.).  If  all  the  other  suppositions 
are  as  little  founded  as  this,  so  little  of  what  is  true 

5^  In  Italy  there  are  nearly  seventy  Episcopal  sees  vacant  (see 
Allgenieine  Zeitung,  Oct.  I,  1869,  No.  294)  ;  many  bishops  of  a  very 
advanced  age  ;  and  the  rights  of  procurators  are  by  no  means  equal 
to  those  of  actual  bishops. 


2  02  The  Church,  the  Dogma,  etc. 

will  remain  in  this  whole  book.  We  already  know, 
from  the  space  in  St  Peter's  allotted  for  the 
Sessions  of  this  august  Assembly,  that  the  new 
Council,  which  meets  a  thousand  years  after  the 
eighth  QEcumenical  Synod,  will  be  called  not 
Lateranciise  scxtitm,  but  Vaticamnn  priimivi  ;  and 
we  may  only  trust  that  it  will  not  be  the  last,  as  it 
is  the  first,  in  the  new  order  of  things  ;  and  perhaps 
many  people  now  regret,  that  instead  of  suspend- 
ing their  judgment  for  a  time,  they  should  with 
blind  precipitancy  have  ushered  it  into  the  world. 


CHAPTER  XII. 


THE   RESULTS   OF  JANUS. 


F  we  ask  what  this  work  has  achieved,  tlie 
answer  will  not  be  found  difficult,  espe- 
cially after  the  judgment  already  passed 
on  the  publication  in  its  first  form.  If, 
as  we  have  seen,  the  book  was  not  unjustly 
accused  "  by  the  most  advanced  party"  of  incon- 
sistency, and  of  a  half-course,  it  is  still  ever  wel- 
come to  the  enemies  of  the  Church,  on  whose 
children,  however,  it  has  inflicted  pain  and  scandal. 
Thoughtless  and  lukewarm  Catholics  it  can  de- 
ceive, but  the  zealous  as  little  as  the  well-informed, 
it  cannot.  By  such  a  course  of  hostile  provocation, 
the  very  opposite  of  what  was  intended  is  brought 
about ;  and  particularly  the  position  of  those  also 
who,  in  regard  at  least  to  certain  wishes  and  many 
questions  of  opportuneness,  would  more  or  less  have 
marched  together  with  the  impetuous  assailants  of 
the  doctrine,  has  been  seriously  complicated. 

"  The  promised  investigation  by  the  light  of 
history  (Pref.  xiii.),  of  those  questions  which  are 
to  be  decided  at  the  QEcumenical  Council  already 
announced,"  is  so  one-sided  and  defective,  so 
coloured  by  the  spirit  of  party,  that  it  can  needs 
satisfy  those  only  who  here  find  their  own  ideas 
enunciated,  who,  without  theological  training,  sit 


264  The  Results  of  J  anus. 

in  judgment  on  theological  subjects;  a  habit  in- 
deed, very  common  to  our  generation,  for  in  these 
matters  every  one  thinks  himself  entitled  to  speak, 
even  when  in  other  departments  he  rigidly  holds 
to  the  Horatian  maxim,  Ne  stitor  2iltra  crepidavi, 
and  most  strictly  forbids  all  the  uninitiated  to 
meddle  with  his  own  calling.^  But  the  present 
age,  so  proud  of  its  knowledge,  among  so  many 
in  the  educated,  literary,  and  official  circles,  evinces 
in  tJieological  matters  precisely  a  degree  of  un- 
fathomable ignorance,  such  as  no  preceding  age 
ever  displayed.  Even  the  narrowest  heads  and 
perruques  of  the  French  Parliaments  of  the  last 
century,  even  when  they  gave  themselves  up  to 
the  most  violent  controversy,  were  far  more  con- 
versant with  these  things,  than  the  majority  of 
their  present  colleagues  under  other  names  and 
robes. 

''A  contribution  to  Church  history"  this  work 
undoubtedly  furnishes,  but  in  a  very  different  way 
indeed  from  what  its  authors  may  have  conceived. 
''For  a  calm  exhibition  of  historical  events"  will 
never  be  found  in  the  confused  medley  of  historical 
data,  arbitrarily  grouped  together;  often  wanting, 
too,  in  chronological  order,  and  in  arbitrarily  de- 
duced inferences,  in  which  logic  is  not  rarely  fear- 
fully mishandled.  The  reader  is  gratified  neither 
with  a  flowing  historical  narrative,  nor  with  an  ex- 
position systematically  arranged,  qualifying  him  to 
form  his  own  judgment.  He  receives  only  a  broth 
cooked  out  of  various  ingredients  for  mere  party 
purposes,  which,  with  the  greatest  pretension,  is 
served  up  to  him  as  the  purest  and  most  savoury 
dish,  such  as  no  artist  in  cookery  has  ever  presented, 

■^  Hier.  ep.  53,  ad  Paulin,  n,  7.  Nulla'ars  sine  Proeceptore  per- 
cipi  potest ;  sola  Scriptura7'um  scientia  est,  quam  passim  sibi  omnes 
vindicant  .  .  .  prsesumant,  doceant,  antequam  discant. 


The  Results  of  Janus.  265 

and  which  he,  in  order  to  find  it  agreeable,  must 
regard  from  the  same  party-view.  As  an  historian, 
Janus  can  only  be  classed  in  the  category  of  those 
manufacturers  of  history  described  by  a  real  his- 
torian,^ **  who  confuse  the  memory  of  the  past, 
who  flatter  the  malicious  demon  lurking  in  the 
breast  of  man,  as  they  ascribe  to  the  most  mag- 
nanimous deeds  impure  motives  and  petty  causes, 
and  delight  to  disfigure  religion  by  an  arbitrary 
misrepresentation  of  facts,  by  the  complacent  por- 
traiture and  prominence  given  to  the  human  and 
impure  elements  accidentally  mixed  up  wäth  sacred 
things."  And  if  all  will  not  immediately  perceive 
that  Janus  has  indulged  in  far  greater  fictions, 
than  those  which  he  has  sought  to  prove  against 
the  Roman  Church,  they  will  still  (to  continue 
the  observations  of  the  same  historian),  *'  by  virtue 
of  their  moral  instinct  and  love  of  truth,  so  care- 
fully cultivated  and  developed,  refuse  to  such  his- 
torians precisely  their  confidence  and  their  belief; 
they  will,  wnth  a  right  gift  of  divination,  even  when 
the  sources  are  inaccessible  to  them,  see  through 
these  unw^orthy  proceedings,  and  by  approxima- 
tion at  least,  often  through  the  mists  of  ingenious 
misrepresentation,  discern  the  truth. 

Further,  the  work  will  contribute  "to  the  awaken- 
ing and  direction  of  a  public  opinion, "  and,  in- 
deed, "such  an  opinion  which,  strong,  unanimous, 
and  at  once  positive  in  its  faith,  will  resist  the 
realization  of  the  Ultramontane  scheme  "^  (Janus, 
Pref.  xxviii.).      Here  predicates  are  united  w^hich 


-  DoUinger,  a  discourse  entitled,  "  Error,  Doubt,  Truth,"  p.  33. 
Munich,  1845. 

3  So  we  are  only  threatened  with  the  realization  of  the  "  Ultra- 
montane scheme,''  and  it  can  still  be  checked.  Elsewhere  Janus 
supposes  that  it  is  already  realized,  and  indeed  for  many  centuries, 
and  in  all  its  hideousness  ! 


206  The  Results  of  J. 


anus. 


are  incompatible.  Unanimity  does  not  prevail 
among  men  who  are,  **  some  for  the  half  and  some 
for  the  whole,"  and  where  unanimity  fails,  there 
vigour  fails  also  ;  and  positive  faith  is  not  great 
where  only  a  negation,  as  here  that  of  "  Ultramon- 
tanism,"  appears  in  the  foreground.  Hence  of  the 
two  alternatives,  so  poetically  described  by  Janus, 
as  to  the  presumptive  effects  of  his  work,  "that  it 
may  perchance  produce  no  more  permanent  effect 
than  a  stone  thrown  into  the  water,  which  makes  a 
momentary  ripple  on  the  surface,  and  then  leaves 
all  as  it  was  before  ;  or  yet  it  may  act  like  a  net  cast 
into  the  sea, which  brings  ina  rich  draughtof  fishes." 
Of  these  two  alternatives,  I  say,  the  former  has  the 
most  probability,  and  history  will  be  spared  the 
pains  of  transferring  the  narrative  of  the  rich  take 
of  fishes  by  Peter  to  the  equally  rich  capture  by 
Janus.  Severe  and  subtle  dialecticians  may,  indeed, 
bring  out  other  possibilities,  and  avow  that  the 
work  is  no  stone,  but  a  net ;  yet  perhaps  a  net, 
which  some  habitants  of  the  sea  will  tear  to  pieces, 
or  such  a  one,  at  least,  that  will  be  drawn  up  with- 
out any  valuable  draught. 

''  But  the  principal  matter  is  an  ecclesiastico- 
political  object :  in  one  word,  it  is  pleading  for  very 
life,  an  appeal  to  the  thinkers  among  believing 
Christians"  (pref  xiii.).  It  is,  indeed,  an  appeal 
against  non-thinkers — an  appeal  before  judgment 
has  been  pronounced,  even  before  any  interlocu- 
tory decree — an  appeal,  not  to  the  Council  before- 
hand stigmatized  and  condemned  by  Janus — an 
appeal,  not  to  bishops,  not  to  theologians,  but  to 
the  whole  educated  secular  world.  Was  such  an 
appeal  ever  before  made  }  Singular  proceeding  ! 
Where  the  question  is  to  weaken  and  to  combat 
Papal  power,  the  authority  of  bishops  is  relied  on  ; 
but  as  soon  as  these  have  done  their  duty  in  regard 


The  Rcsitlls  of  y amis.  267 

to  the  Pope,  they  then  may  c^o  their  way.  If  the 
bishops  are  not  found  to  hold  Hke  sentiments  with 
themselves,  these  people  then  turn  to  the  educated 
laity.  Then  theological  controversies  are  retailed 
in  political  newspapers,  and  inquiries,  which  claim 
an  authority  equal  to  the  lucubrations  of  the 
Fathers  of  the  Church,  are  printed  beside  thea- 
trical and  artistic  notices,  beside  domestic  and 
political  quarrels,  and  the  vulgar  gossip  of  the  city. 
As  once,  in  the  times  of  the  Arians,  when  men  dis- 
puted upon  the  "  begotten  and  the  unbegotten," 
upon  the  words  "  from  the  non-existent"  and  "  from 
the  Father  ;"  as  in  the  times  of  the  Hesitants 
(SiaKpLvo/jievoL),  when,  under  the  asseveration  of  the 
most  rigid  orthodoxy,  the  celebrated  tome  of  St 
Leo,  and  the  Council  of  Chalcedon,  the  most  bril- 
liant of  all  the  earlier  Councils,  were  rejected  with 
horror ;  now  in  the  streets,  merchants,  artisans, 
artists  of  every  sort,  soldiers,  women,  and  boys,  and 
especially  state-functionaries,  are  to  discuss  the 
doctrines  about  Council  and  Pope,  the  propositions 
of  the  Encyclical  and  of  the  Syllabus.  The  mass  of 
the  "cultivated"  are  to  sit  in  judgment  upon  the 
Apostolic  See,  and  the  College  of  Bishops,  w^hether 
dispersed  or  assembled  in  General  Council;  and  this 
latter  Assembly  is  to  be  made  subject  to  conditions, 
on  whose  fulfilment  the  submission  to  its  decrees 
will  be  made  dependent. 

Further,  the  work  of  Janus  is  to  be  a  *'  protest, 
based  on  history  (?),  against  a  menacing  future, 
against  the  programme  of  a  powerful  coalition." 
The  future  is  hidden  from  us  all  ;  the  prospects 
which  render  a  conjecture  possible,  are  solely 
expressed  by  the  words,  "  powerful  coalition."  But 
by  the  side  of  this  coalition — and  who  has  defined 
it  .'* — by  the  side  of  this  coalition,  we  say,  we  find 
no  statesmen,  no  powerful  ones  of  the  earth.     Its 


268  The  Residts  of  Jantis. 

supreme  head  has  ever  to  struggle  with  menacing 
foes  ;  the  sword  ever  hangs  over  the  heads  of  its 
most  eminent  defenders ;  and  lastly,  this  coalition 
has  but  very  small  material  means  to  dispose  of, 
and  intellectual  resources  it  can  have  none ;  for  we 
are  told  "  all  cultivated  classes "  are  against  it. 
And  yet  withal,  this  coalition  is  mighty  !  And  on 
the  other  side  stand  science  and  diplomacy,  and 
behind  them  numerous  armies  and  powerful  allies 
of  every  kind  ;  for  the  sympathy  of  Protestants  also 
has  been  awakened  ;  they  have  been  alarmed  and 
terrified,  and  so  converted  into  allies  against  the 
degenerate  Papacy.  For  though  this  "  serious 
danger  threatens  primarily  the  internal  condition 
of  the  Catholic  Church,  yet  it  is,  as  is  inevitable  with 
what  affects  a  Corporation  including  180,000,000  of 
men,  destined  to  assume  vaster  dimensions,  and 
take  the  shape  of  a  great  social  problem,  which 
cannot  be  without  its  influence  on  ecclesiastical 
communities  and  nations  outside  the  Catholic 
Church  "  (Pref ,  p.  xiv.).  Already  certain  classes  of 
Protestants,  hostile  to  all  "  priestcraft,"  have  taken 
occasion  "  to  conjure  up  the  spirits  of  the  Reforma- 
tion against  the  Obscurantists  in  Rome."  ^ 

"  The  danger  signalized,"  it  is  further  said,  "  does 
not  date  from  yesterday,  and  did  not  begin  with 
the  proclamation  of  the  Council.  For  some  twenty- 
four  years  (was  it  in  1845,  in  the  time  of  the  vertigo 
of  Ronge  }  or,  was  it  twenty-one  years  ago,  in 
1848,  in  the  time  when  Germany  made  its  first 
efforts  for  ecclesiastical  freedom  ?)  the  reactionary 
movement  in  the  Catholic  Church,  which  is  now 
swollen    to   a    mighty  torrent  (perhaps  it   was   a 

^  Cf.  the  Literary  Magazine,  entitled,  "  Ausland,"  nth  Sept.  1869, 
n.  37,  in  an  article  entitled,  "  The  Roman  Council,"  on  occasion  of 
Otho  Stäeckel's  translation  of  Hutten's  Dialogue,  "  The  Roman 
Trinity."     Berlin. 


The  Rcs7ills  of  Janiis.  269 

movement  reverting  to  its  source),  has  been  mani- 
festing itself,  and  now  it  is  preparing,  like  an 
advancing  flood-tide,  to  take  possession  of  the 
zvJiolc  organic  life  of  the  Church  by  means  of  this 
Council/'  If  the  danger  dates  from  twenty-four 
years  back,  where  were  then  the  present  champions 
of  genuine  ecclesiastical  life  ?  Were  they  not  yet 
born,  or  were  they  then  found  in  another  camp  ? 
Have  they  been  sleeping  and  dreaming  away  their 
lives  ?  Were  they  then  so  imbecile  as  not  to  dis- 
cern the  danger  ?  Were  they  so  servile,  so  cowardly, 
as  not  to  signalise  it,  although  it  had  already 
"  begun  to  manifest  itself?"  We  know  of  no  an- 
swer to  these  questions  ;  but  that  we  are  justified 
in  proposing  them,  can  scarcely  be  denied. 

Against  the  "  programme  of  a  powerful  coalition, 
in  whose  realization  a  thousand  busy  hands  are 
daily  and  hourly  at  work,"  we  should  have  expected 
a  counter-programme  clearly  defined,  which  we 
perhaps,  though  with  some  modifications,  might 
have  accepted.  But  nowhere  is  such  given,  or  even 
any  satisfactory  explanation  aft*orded.  For  the 
two  assertions  (Janus,  pref  p.  xv.),  the  first,  as  to 
the  due  relation  to  principles  of  political,  intel- 
lectual, and  religious  freedom  and  independence, 
understood  in  a  Christian  sense,  and  not  in  the 
sense  of  Frohschammer  ;  and  the  second,  as  to  the 
necessity  of  a  reform  in  the  Church,  are  infinitely 
wide,  admit  of  a  thousand  different  shades,  and 
furnish  no  solid  palpable  groundwork.^  In  the 
whole  work  of  Janus  there  is,  amid  a  thousand 
negations,  scarcely  anything  positive  to  be  dis- 
cerned, except  it  be  an  occasional  hint  that  seems 

^  As  equitable  concessions,  which  ought  to  have  been  made  in 
the  sixteenth  century  (that  is,  before  the  year  1 560),  are  mentioned 
by  Janus  (p.  370),  the  cup  for  the  laity,  priestly  marriage,  but 
principally  the  abolition  of  the  Papal  system.     Like  thoughts  were 


270  The  Results  of  Janus, 

to  point  to  the  resuscitation  of  "  an  antediluvian 
Church  policy"  (to  use  the  words  of  an  ingenious 
Catholic  writer),  but  which  is  yet  not  so  long  ex- 
tinct— to  the  resuscitation  of  Gallicanism,  with  a 
small  dose  of  Jansenism  and  of  Febronianism,  in 
a  new  historical  dress.  Two  questions  would  have 
to  be  examined.  In  the  first  place,  what  are  the 
existing  abuses  in  the  Church  ?  and  secondly,  on 
what  do  they  rest  ?  But  in  nowise  could  it  be 
beforehand  surmised,  that  all  abuses  should  have 
their  foundation  in  the  present  constitution  of  the 
Papacy.  For  many  abuses  many  other  causes  and 
sources  might  be  assigned,  not  merely  human  im- 
perfections and  frailties,  but  many  foreign  in- 
fluences also,  such  as  that  of  the  non-Catholic 
literature,  of  the  encroachments  of  the  civil  power 
upon  the  Church,  the  materialistic  tendencies  of 
the  times,  and  so  forth  ;  then  the  reaction  that  had 
become  necessary  against  other  evils,  in  themselves 
perhaps  not  of  less  magnitude ;  and  lastly,  the 
mildness  and  forbearance  shown  towards  old,  long- 
established  institutions,  and  towards  personal  and 
local  interests.  But  to  achieve  anything  practical, 
we  must  needs  have  before  us  clearly  discerned  and 
consistently  prosecuted  aims  ;  but  in  Janus  we  find 
nothing  but  inconsistency.  It  suf^ces  not  to  boast 
''  of  a  view  of  the  Catholic  Church  and  her  mission, 
which  its  opponents  designate  by  that  much-abused 
term,  so  convenient  in  its  vagueness  for  polemical 
purposes — liberal ;  a  term  in  the  worst  repute  with 
all  uncompromising  adherents  of  the  Court  of 
Rome  and  of  the  Jesuits — two  powers  intimately 
allied,^ — and  never  mentioned  by  them  without  bit- 
entertained  by  Febronius  (Append,  iv.,  p.  133),  by  George  Wizel 
(Raynald  a.  1562,  n.  28),  and  by  others.  Cf.  Zaccaria  Antifebronio 
I.,  p.  ix. 
^  The  lord  and  the  servant  are  here  in  our  times,  so  much  in- 


The  RcsicUs  of  Jamis.  2  7 1 

terness "  (Pref.  xv.)  ;  nay,  with  a  bitterness  com- 
pared with  which  everything  said  in  our  book 
against  Popery  and  Jesuitism  is  but  the  sweetest 
honey.  "  A  view  in  the  worst  repute  "  at  Rome, 
yet  furnishes  of  itself  no  safe  remedy ;  this  even 
Janus  will  concede,  and  even  if  one  boasts  of  this 
bad  repute,  still  one  is  not  dispensed  from  the  duty 
of  alleging  proofs. 

The  protest  here  brought  forward  really  consti- 
tutes, as  has  been  shown,  a  protest  against  the 
supremacy  of  the  Apostolic  See,  against  the 
authority  of  General  Councils,  against  the  very 
dogma  of  the  Church  herself.  It  is  a  shot  fired  off 
in  blind  passion,  reaching  far  beyond  the  mark.  Or 
in  other  words,  Janus  has  shown  all  the  capacity  to 
strike  out  the  bottom  of  the  barrel,  without  turning 
that  capacity  to  advantage ;  he  has  contented  him- 
self with  a  barrel  utterly  perforated.  He  appears 
like  an  unfortunate  architect,  without  on  that  ac- 
count being  original  and  successful  in  the  art  of 
destroying ;  there  remains  in  him  too  much  of 
"the  Papistical  leaven,"  which  resembles  too  much 
that  of  the  Pharisee  ;  while  to  others  again  he  offers 
much  too  little  of  it.^  If  it  were  unavoidable  to 
bring  forward  the  dark  sides  of  the  Papacy  (p.  21), 
so  there  was  still  no  need  of  exaggerating  and  un- 
duly magnifying  them,  and  this  by  a  misrepresen- 
tation of  history.  The  authors,  who  conceal  them- 
selves under  the  mask  of  Janus,  fear  the  reproach 
of  an  absence  of  piety  (p.  20).     But  let  them  be 

clined  to  democracy,  suitably  mentioned  as  allies  and  confederates 
— two  great  powers  which  are  to  be  overturned. 

'  On  the  whole,  Janus  appears  to  us  to  have  come  too  late.  (See 
our  6th  chapter  above.)  Under  Pope  Nicholas  I.,  Janus  would 
perhaps  have  been  a  Hercules,  slaying  the  dragon  pseudo-Isidore  ; 
under  Louis  the  Bavarian,  he  would  have  been  a  reforming  anti- 
pope  ;  and  perhaps  in  the  flourishing  times  of  the  Congress  of  Ems, 
he  might  have  become  a  German  national  patriarch. 


272  The  Results  of  J  anus. 

tranquil  on  that  head ;  where  there  is  such  an 
"absence  of  passion,"  there  surely  an  absence  of. 
piety  cannot  be  spoken  of.  We  would  fain  beheve 
that  the  intention  of  these  authors  was  a  good  one; 
that  they  held  it  to  be  a  duty,  according  to  the 
''  measure  of  their  knowledge  and  their  working 
power,"  to  make  the  attempt,  whether  something 
could  not  be  done  to  ward  off  what  they  deemed  so 
fatal  a  catastrophe  (p.  xix.).  But  as  little  do  we 
deem  that  the  means  selected  were  the  fitting  ones, 
as  the  measure  of  knowledge  was  that  here  required 
and  in  every  respect  suitable.  Before  any  Catholic 
denounces  to  the  world  a  "  disfigurement  and  dis- 
turbance of  the  Church,  and  of  the  truth  "  (p.  xxi.), 
he  ought  to  have  in  hand  the  most  valid  proofs  ; 
but  these  have  not  been  brought  forward.  Instead 
thereof  we  are  furnished  with  materials  partly  old, 
long  extant  in  polemical  writings,  fully  appreciated 
by  Catholic  theologians  of  the  last  two  centuries, 
though  these  have  not  been  deemed  worthy  of  the 
honour  of  a  refutation ;  and  again,  we  find  materials 
partly  new,  but  which  signify  the  same  thing,  and 
lead  to  no  other  inferences.  The  fundamental 
ideas  of  Janus  have  all  been  earlier  enunciated 
by  Richer,  Sarpi,  Launoy,  by  the  Gallicans,  and  the 
Jansenists,  who  well  understood  the  stratagem  of 
striking  at  the  "  Curia ;  "^  but  most  completely  have 
these  thoughts  been  expressed  by  Justinus  Feb- 
ronius,  or  by  John  Nicholas  of  Hontheim.  From 
the  latter  we  hear  the  same  complaints  as  to  the 
abuses  of  the  Roman  monarchy^  and  of  the  Papal 
tribunals  ;'°  he  evinces  the  same  hatred  towards  the 

^  According  to  the  Jansenists,  un  petit  detour,  qu'on  use,  lorsque 
la  Cour  de  Rome  se  rend  digne  qu'on  ait  pour  eile  quelques  men- 
agemens.     (Notes  eccles.  27,  Mars  1765). 

9  C.  9,  §  4,  n.  4.     Ep.  ad.  Clem  XIII. 

!'>  C.  7,  §  2,  n.  I  ;  c.  5,  §  3,  n.  7  ;  c.  7,  §  7,  n.  6  ;  §  8,  n.  7  ;  c.  9,  § 
7,  seq. 


The  Res2dts  of  yamcs.  273 

religious  orders,"  the  same  predilection  for  the 
writers  hostile  to  the  Popes/''  the  same  aversion 
for  canonists  and  jurists,  the  same  view  as  to  the 
influence  of  the  pseduo-Isidorian  decretals,'^  the 
same  tendency  to  exasperate  princes  and  bishops 
against  the  sovereign  Pontiff,'"^  and  to  further  a  pure 
episcopal  system,  and  so  to  transform  the  constitu- 
tion of  the  Church,  according  to  the  decrees  of 
Constance  and  Basle,  whose  undoubted  validity  is 
likewise  presupposed.'^  Not  even  the  internal 
contradictions  of  the  Febronian  system,  which 
converts  bishops  so  highly  exalted  by  him  into 
mere  witnesses  of  their  communities,'^  has  Janus 
known  how  to  reconcile.  If  others  think  to  find 
Janus  an  abriged  Jansenius,  we  find  in  him  but  a 
prolonged  Febronius.  There  is  the  same  regard 
for  the  Protestant  world  ;  but  the  reunion  of  Pro- 
testants with  the  Catholic  Church  is  not  promoted, 
when  the  unity  of  the  latter  is  weakened.  The 
ancient  Bossuet  could  bring  back  many  non- 
Catholic  Christians  to  the  bosom  of  the  Church  ; 
but  these  modern  Bossuets  *  can  only  frighten  them 
away,  and  rather  make  Protestants  out  of  Catholics, 
than  turn  Protestants  into  Catholics.  But  we  must 
ask  ourselves,  Is,  then,  our  age  really  so  poor  in 
ideas,  that  when  discontented  with  the  present  state 


»  C.  7,  §  8,  n.  7,  9  ;  c.  4,  §  7,  n.  i. 

"  C.  5,  §  3,  n.  4,  §  6,  n.  4  ;  c.  8,  §  7,  n.  9 ;  c.  9,  §  9. 

13  C.  3,  §  I,  seq. 

1*  See  the  Addresses  ad  Reges  et  principes,  ad  Episcopos.  In 
the  charges  against  Popes  Alexander  V.,  Martin  V,,  and  Eugenius 
IV.,  for  abridging  or  frustrating  ecclesiastical  reforms  (Janus,  p.  309, 
seq.),  perfectly  concurs  with  Febronius  (c.  6,  §  15,  n.  2,  §  20,  n.  3). 
See  the  reply  of  Zaccaria  in  Antifebronio  i,  p.  Ixxxvi.,  seq. 

15C.  6,  §  i,n.  2;  §15,  n.  3. 

15  C.  6,  §  8,  n.  12. 

*  It  is  needless  to  observe,  that  the  great  Bossuet  would  have 
looked  with  as  much  horror  on  a  book  like  Janus,  as  Bellamiine 
himsel£ — Trans, 

S 


2  74  The  Restdts  of  JamLs. 

of  the  Church,  we  must  have  recourse  to  the  revival 
of  extinct  theological  systems,  such  as  Gallican- 
ism,^^  to  the  resuscitation  of  long-abandoned 
views,  such  as  Febronlanism,  so  closely  allied  with 
Josephism  and  Regalism  ?  Whom  do  these  people 
hope  to  gain  ?  The  strictly  orthodox  ?  But  these 
have  often  enough  resisted  such  allurements.  Is 
it  the  indlfiferentlsts  and  the  unbelievers  ?  They 
need  no  resuscitated  Episcopal  system  ;  they  need 
no  decrees  of  Constance  and  Basle  ;  they  wish,  in- 
deed, for  no  new  article  of  faith  set  up,  but  would 
fain  see  all  the  old  ones,  as  much  as  possible, 
aboHshed,  and  most  especially  those  on  the  sacra- 
ments of  penance  and  matrimony.  We  know 
what  Febronlus  wrought  among  the  Protestants  ;  ^^ 
how  many  errors  were  then  proved  against  him  by 
German  and  non-German  theologians ;  ^^  and  we 
know,  too,  what  from  the  attempted  execution  of 
his  projects,  ensued  for  the  Ecclesiastical  Princi- 
palities, and  for  the  old  German  empire.^°  Will 
our  age  show  itself  more  favourable  to  his  dis- 
ciples, and  to  those  who  emulate  his  conduct  ?  We 
may  answer  in  the  affirmative  and  in  the  negative. 
Affirmatively  in  those  circles,  which  still  live  in  the 
canon  law  of  the  courtiers  and  statesmen  of  the 
preceding  century,  and  know  no  higher  ideal  than 
the  ideal  of  that  age.  But  no,  and  again  no,  in  all 
other  circles,  different  as  they  may  be  in  their 

^7  Vide  Allgemeine  Zeitung,  2ist  Oct.  1869.  App.  No.  294  (article, 
entitled  "Catholicism  in  France  on  the  Eve  of  the  CEcumenical 
Council").  Here  we  read,  "  The  proper  Gallicanism  has  been  so 
much  modihed,  that  we  may  say  it  exists  no  longer." 

^8  New  learned  notices,  Nova  acta  eruditorum.  Lips.  1764,  p. 
I.  Jablonski  Instit.  Hist.  Chr.,  t.  iii.,  p.  146.  Carl  Frederick  Bahrdt, 
dissert,  v.,  Dec.  1763,  §§  vi.,  viii.,  xvi. 

13  Werner  ("History  of  Catholic  Theology  in  Germany,"  p. 
212),  and  Phillips  (Can.  Law,  iii.,  §  136,  p.  372,  seq.)  specify  the 
writings. 

'"■^  Phillips,  loc.  cU.,  p.  381  f. 


The  Rcsii Us  of  Ja n  ns.  275 

principles,   their  position,  their  efforts,   and   their 
claims. 

Even  in  the  circles  to  which  Janus  belongs,  its 
small  success  seems  more  and  more  to  be  dis- 
cerned. Not  in  vain  did  a  writer  in  the  official 
Monitcur  of  this  party,"  the  Augsburg  Allge- 
meine Zeitung^^  a  "distinguished"  Catholic  nearly- 
akin  to  Janus,  and  appearing  under  a  similar  signa- 
ture, recently  show  that  the  political  importance  of 
the  infallibility  of  the  Pope  and  of  the  Chnych,  is 
still  not  sufficiently  appreciated ;  that  on  the  part  of 
liberals,  Rome's  power  is  too  much  undervalued  ; 
and  that  by  a  course  of  instruction  suitable  to  the 
age,  the  people  must  be  emancipated  from  the 
dogma  of  Infallibility.  In  the  same  article  there 
are  many  other  proposals  and  insinuations,  full  of 
benevolence  towards  the  Catholic  clergy,  and  point- 
ing to  an  emancipation  of  the  people  from  the 
fetters  of  authority.^^      It  was  thought  that  the 

-^  This  epithet  is  the  more  justified,  as  the  above-named  organ 
will  give  publicity  to  no  other  views,  and  as  I  perceive  from  the  criti- 
cism of  Professor  Merkle  (p.  2,  n.  i),  that  1  have  just  received, 
closed  its  columns  against  his  refutation  of  the  falsehood  propagated 
about  Pope  Alexander  III.  On  the  other  hand,  the  same  journal  in 
its  Appendix,  2  ist  Nov.  1869,  brings  up,  as  I  am  now  writing,  an 
essay  signed  A.  W.,  upon  the  confessors  of  princes,  and  which 
shamefully  reviles  the  Catholic  Sacrament  of  Penance,  and  serves 
up  the  most  barefaced  historical  falsehoods,  twice  only  giving  its 
authorities,  one  the  pretended  "  Catechism  of  the  Jesuits,"  printed  at 
Leipsic,  1820;  and  the  other  the  infamous  "MonitaSecreta,"  a  work 
which  has  been  long  proved  to  be  a  fabrication  of  their  enemies. 
Yet  in  despite  of  this  fact,  the  same  work  is  incessantly  brought  up 
by  Protestant  preachers  down  to  H.  A.  Bergmann  (Leipsic,  1867) ; 
but  by  all  learned  inquirers  it  has  been  cast  into  the  literary  lumber- 
room  (see  the  Bonn  Journal  of  Theol.  Lit.,  No.  9,  p.  329,  1867). 
Such  historical  productions  are  indeed  worthy  of  the  journal,  in 
which  the  good  Catholic  Janus  has  thought  proper  to  depose  the 
fruits  of  his  profound  researches. 

"2  Allgemeine  Zeituftg,  7th  Nov.  1869.  Extra  Append.  No.  311, 
Nov.  8. 

23  That  even  in  the  conferences  respecting  the  new  election  strug- 
gles in  Bavaria,  the  impending  deliberations  of  the  CEcumenical 


276  The  Results  of  Janus, 

impressions  already  produced  on  the  readers  of  the 
paper  might,  by  continued  efforts,  be  renewed  ;  and 
that  by  a  repeated  dose  of  the  medicinal  powder, 
the  success  already  obtained  might  be  further  pro- 
moted. To  revive  the  courage  of  the  party  the 
essay,  entitled  ''  The  Bishops  and  the  Council," 
was  particularly  serviceable  ;  ^''  for  in  this  the  warn- 
ings of  the  bishops  of  Hungary,  Bohemia,  and  Ger- 
many, in  Rome,  were  spoken  of,  as  well  as  the 
success  they  had  thereby  attained  ;  inasmuch  as 
the  scheme  of  proclaiming  the  dogma  of  Infalli- 
bility by  way  of  acclamation  appears  to  be 
given  up. 

We  are  not  informed  of  the  proceedings  in  Fulda, 
and  know  nothing  of  the  letters  of  the  bishops  of 
Bohemia  and  Hungary;  we  have  no  Roman  ac- 
counts as  to  the  views  and  measuresof  thePapalcon- 
gregations  in  recent  times  ;  but  we  think  that  these 
and  other  notices  from  such  a  source,  as  the  Allge- 
inei7ie  Zeitung,  are  to  be  received  with  more  than 
usual  caution. ^^  When  we  are  informed  that  all 
hope  has  vanished,  that  the  Council  could  conclude 
its  labours  in  three  weeks,  so  to  all  those  who  for 
a  time  had  in  a  single  commission  been  engaged  in 
the  preparatory  labours,  this  statement  would,  even 
in  February  and  March  of  last  year,  have  appeared 
extremely  ludicrous ;  and  in  fact  no  one,  with  the 
exception  of  a  French  journal  and  its  mahcious 
echo,  has  seriously  believed  in  this  report.  It 
would  almost  appear  as  if  the  Augsburg  Gazette 

Council  were  made  a  subject  of  comment,  we  learn  from  a  Munich 
correspondent  of  the  Allgemeiyie  Zeiüing,  5th  Nov.  1 869,  No.  309. 

2^  Allgemeine  Zeitung,  19th  and  20th  Nov.  1869.  Append.  No. 
323,  seq. 

-^  Moreover  in  Rome  also  there  is,  as  in  the  rest  of  the  world, 
a  pretended  mortified  ambition  ;  from  Rome,  too,  as  from  other 
capitals,  false  reports  can  be  propagated.  During  the  sittings  of 
the  Council,  this  will  occur  in  a  still  greater  degree.  For  this  the 
Catholics  of  Germany  must  hold  themselves  prepared. 


The  Results  of  Jan  ns.  277 

would  fain  secure  for  itself  an  honourable  re- 
treat. A  further  step  is  made,  when  nozv  in  con- 
nexion with  the  abandonment  of  the  mode  of 
acclamation,  it  is  believed  that  measures  have 
been  introduced,  whereby  the  bishops  may  con- 
fer and  deliberate  on  the  matters  proposed  to  tJic 
Council ;  as  if  from  the  beginning  this  course  were 
not  of  necessity  presupposed,  but  were  originally 
excluded  from  the  plan  of  proceedings.  If  in  the 
sittings  of  the  preparatory  Commissions,  the  mem- 
bers of  the  minority  could,  even  under  the  presi- 
dency of  a  cardinal,  defend  with  the  fullest  energy 
their  divergencies  of  opinion ;  if  in  the  mere  prelude 
to  the  Council,  a  freedom  of  discussion  was  per- 
mitted, such  as  is  not  easily  found  in  any  other 
well-regulated  assembly ;  then  how  could  the  design 
be  possibly  entertained  of  withdrawing  from  the 
Bishops  the  right  of  conference  and  deliberation, 
that  by  a  much  stronger  title  belongs  to  them  } 
The  insinuation  is  as  absurd  as  the  scornful  mockery 
about  "  the  head-clerk  of  all  the  clerks  of  the  Councir 
is  frivolous  ;  while  the  factious  summons  to  the 
bishops,  "  to  make  an  attempt  to  recoiiqiier  \h.€\x  old 
apostolic  (he  might  have  added  their  inalienable) 
rights,  which  the  Papacy  had  either  abridged  or 
wrested  from  them,*'  is  quite  in  the  spirit  of  Jus- 
tinus  Febronius.^^  But  this  article  could  not  con- 
clude without  giving  a  supplement  to  the  historical 
exposition  of  Janus,  and  which  in  a  second  edition 
of  that  work,  must  certainly  be  incorporated  into 
it.  I  should  be  obliged,  as  I  am  anxious  to 
send  my  manuscript  to  the  press,  to  add  a  new 
chapter,  were  I  to  expose,  as  they  merit,  the  new 
charges  heaped  against  the  Popes.  Yet  some  will 
I   briefly  touch  on.     The  persecution  of  English 

-^  According  to  Febronius  (c,  8,  §  6,  cf.  c.  9,  §  9),  no  prtescriptio, 
cessio,  possessio,  consuetudo  can  protect  the  popes. 


278  The  Results  of  Ja^ius. 

Catholics,  that  lasted  for  centuries,  was,  it  seems, 
brought  about  by  the  prohibition  of  Pope  Paul  V. 
against  their  taking  the  oath  of  allegiance  to  their 
kings.^^  "Although  that  oath,  it  is  said,  contained 
nothing  repugnant  to  the  religious  principles  of  Ca- 
tholics, yet  the  Pope  declared  it  to  be  reprehensible, 
because  identifying  the  well-being  of  the  Church 
with  his  arrogated  rights,  he  could  not  endure  that 
this  oath  should  state,  that  the  Pope  hath  no  power 
and  authority  to  depose  kings,  to  absolve  subjects 
from  their  allegiance,  and  to  excite  against  sove- 
reigns and  the  state  rebellion  and  outrages."  Paul 
v.,  indeed,  in  1606  and  1607,  condemned  the  oath 
demanded  by  King  James  I.,^^  because  it  was  un- 
lawful, and  on  several  points  was  openly  opposed  to 
faith  and  to  the  welfare  of  souls  ;  and  as  it  was  in 
itself,  and  was  intended  to  be  but  a  disguised  oath 
of  supremacy,  which  Catholics  could  not  take,  the 
Pontiff  was  fully  justified  in  the  course  he  pursued. 
For  in  the  sense  of  the  oath,  even  supreme  ecclesi- 
astical authority  is  ascribed  to  the  King  as  an 
absolutely  sovereign  ruler ;  and  at  the  conclusion, 
the  Catholics  were  called  upon  to  confess,  that  the 
oath  wherein  even  questions  of  faith  were  treated 
of,  had  been  lawfully  imposed  by  a  full  and  compe- 
tent authority.  Next,  the  oath  condemned  an 
opinion,  held  by  many  men  of  high  authority  in 
the  Q\vaxQ\\,as  godless  and  heretical ;  and  this  neither 
individual  Catholics,  nor  any  secular  power,  had 
the  right  to  do  ;  and  lastly,  in  order  to  render  the 
Roman  Church  odious,  it  falsely  imputed  to  it  the 
doctrine,  that  princes  excommunicated  could  be 
slam  by  any  private  individual  at  his  will.    If  Bel- 

^  Allgemeine  Zeitzmg.,  20th  Nov.,  Append.  1869.  Cf.  Defensio 
declarat.  Cleri  gallic,  t.  i.,  P.  ii.,  1.  viii.  (al  iv.),  c.  23. 

^^  The  Formula  is  to  be  found  in  Rapin  Thoyras  Hist,  de  1' Angle- 
terre,  t.  vii.,  1.  xviii.,  anno  1606. 


The  Restilts  of  yamis.  279 

larmine,  Suarez,  and  others,  alleged  theological 
arguments  for  the  indirect  power  of  the  Church  ; 
yet  neither  Paul  V.,  nor  any  other  Pope,  bound  Eng- 
lish or  other  Catholics  to  hold  this  opinion  as  an 
article  of  faith  ;  but  even  quite  independently  of 
this  consideration,  the  condemnation  of  this  form 
of  oath  was  perfectly  justified. ^^ 

We  see,  indeed,  in  what  quarter  excitement,  rest- 
lessness, dread,  and  the  pain  of  uncertainty  prevail; 
we  see  how  no  means  are  left  unattempted,  in 
order  to  work  on  the  public  mind  to  confirm  more 
and  more  the  historical  views  of  the  party,  and 
to  propagate  various  reports  of  the  like  tendency. 
So  again  it  is  reported  from  Vienna,^°  that  a  letter 
has  been  addressed  by  the  Roman  Curia  to  cer- 
tain eminent  prelates,  which  appears,  indeed, 
very  questionable  ;  though  to  many,  in  truth,  it 
will  appear  but  too  probable,  that  it  is  precisely 
the  clamour  raised  about  the  Papal  prerogatives, 
and  the  action  of  the  *'  non-Ultramontanes,"  which 
seem  calculated  to  necessitate  the  Council  to  pro- 
nounce upon  questions  which,  in  Germany,  Eng- 
land, and  France  have  been  agitated  with  so  much 
violence  and  rancour.  Let  us  hope  that  this  heat 
will  cool  down  by  degrees,  and  that  moderation 
and  prudence  will  return. 

Far  more  decorous,  cautious,  and  measured  is 
a  small  pamphlet  that  has  recently  appeared ;  ^' 
though  this,  too,  moves  in  the  same  circle  of  ideas 
as  Janus,  and  in  a  summary  way  reflects  much  of 
that  production.     But  the  twenty-six  theses  here 

2^  F/V/^  Gosselin,  1.  c,  pp.  282-288,  where  the  literature  on  this 
subject  is  given.  On  the  decrees  of  Popes  Nicholas  V.  and  Alex- 
ander  VI.  likewise  cited,  see  ibid.^  pp.  269-271.  Bianchi  t.  xi.,  1.  vi., 
§  9,  p.  568,  seq. 

3"  Allgemeine  Zeitufig,  23d  Nov.  1869.     Append. 

'^  *'  Considerations  for  the  Bishops  of  the  Council  respecting  the 
question  of  Papal  Infallibility,"  p.  17.     October  1869.     Munich. 


28o  The  Results  of  J  antes, 

laid  down  mostly  want  the  ulterior  proofs  ;  and  if 
we  are  to  seek  these  in  Janus,  we  shall  certainly 
not  find  a  firm  and  solid  basis  for  these  allegations. 
We  meet  with  too  many  apodictic  judgments,  that 
yet  on  a  closer  examination  turn  out  to  be  very 
problematical.  That  here  no  St  Bernard,  no 
Fenelon  speaks,  the  reader  will  immediately  dis- 
cover. How  any  one  can  assert^*  that  it  was  07ily 
by  coercion  and  violence,  and  by  the  putting  down 
of  all  dissentients,  the  opinion  of  Papal  Infalli- 
bility could  spread,  is  to  us  utterly  inexplicable. 
This  doctrine  was  yet  advocated  in  France  by 
eminent  theologians,^^  and  in  despite,  too,  of  the 
greatest  disfavour  on  the  part  of  the  Court,  and 
amid  much  opposition ;  while  the  contrary  view 
enjoyed  every  kind  of  official  patronage,  and  was 
thereby  able  to  spread  elsewhere.  From  the  fact 
that,  on  the  20th  January  1626,  Papal  Infallibility 
was  proclaimed  in  France  with  a  degree  of  spon- 
taneousness  which  certainly  was  wanting  to  the 
Declaration  of  1682,  and  from  the  very  great 
number  of  Infallibilists  of  all  countries  and  ages, 
of  all  positions  and  callings,  including  men  of  solid 
learning  and  holy  lives,  it  is  morally  impossible,  as 
well  as  most  offensive  to  the  whole  Church,  to 
represent  the  diffusion  of  this  doctrine  as  brought 
about  by  acts  of  tyranny.  In  reference  to  the 
alleged  forgeries,  the  author  of  the  "  Considera- 
tions" completely  coincides  with  Janus ;  and  so, 
likewise,  with  regard  to  the  asserted  obligatory 
force  of  the  decrees  of  Constance  and  Basle,  which 


^^  "  Considerations  for  the  Bishops,"  p.  15.     22d  Thesis. 

^^  Cf.  the  above  cited  work  of  Gerin  on  the  Assembly  of  1682, 
which  furnishes  rich  materials  on  the  subject.  Also  Charlas  de 
libertat.  Eccl.  gallic,  L.  vii,,  c.  10,  seq.;  c.  13.  Bennettis,  P. 
I,  t.  i.,  p,  303,  seq.  Zaccaria  Antifebronio,  i.  Introd.,  c.  iv.,  p, 
lix.  j.,  seq. 


The  Rcsidts  of  J  amis.  2  8 1 

the  by  far  greater  portion  of  the  Church  has  not 
recognized.  In  short,  we  here  find  a  recurrence 
of  the  same  theory,  of  the  same  view  as  to  the 
present  state  of  the  Church,  which  for  so  long  a 
time  has  experienced,  borne,  nay,  approved  of  a 
frightful  disfigurement.^'^ 

Independently  of  the  suspicions  cast  upon  the 
defenders  of  Papal  Infallibility,  who  for  the  greater 
part  are  represented  as  members  of  the  great 
Monastic  orders,  entirely  dependent  on  Rome, 
then  again,  as  partly  Cardinals,  partly  candidates 
for  the  Cardinalitial  dignity — yet  among  these  are 
not  to  be  included  very  many  eminent  theologians 
belonging  to  the  secular  clergy,  who  never  became 
Cardinals,  nor  ever  canvassed  for  the  Roman 
purple  ;^^  independently  of  these  imputations,  we 
say,  the  writer  especially  insists,  that  with  the 
assumption  of  Papal  Infallibility  is  indissolubly 
connected  the  acceptance  of  the  doctrine  also, 
"  that  the  Popes  possess  an  nnlimitcd  power  over 
all  princes  and  magistrates,  over  all  states  and 
commonwealths  ;  that  they  can  at  their  good  plea- 
sure interfere  with  sovereign  power  in  all  affairs  of 
civil  government,  depose  princes,  overthrow  laws, 
and  decide  on  questions  of  peace  or  war/'^^  But 
here  the  theological  opinion  respecting  the  indirect 
power  of  the  Church  in  temporal  matters  is  mis- 
represented and  unduly  extended,^^  and  the  writer 

'*  As  to  what  position  (according  to  Janus)  the  I^ishops  are  to  take 
with  regard  to  their  "communities,"  this  pamphlet,  which  in  all 
appearance  is  destined  for  the  ecclesiastical  aristocracy,  says  not 
a  word.  It  appears  almost  like  an  editio  castigata  in  usum  Del- 
phini. 

*^  P.  15.  23d  Thesis.  See  Merkle's  Critique  on  this,  p.  38, 
sfq. 

^  P.  13.     19th  Thesis. 

'7  Cf.  the  opinion  of  the  Theological  Faculty  of  Würzburg  of 
the  7th  July  1869,  ii.,  §  27,  seq.  The  author  of  the  Introduction 
to  the  Cologne  edition  of  the  Encyclical  and  of  the  Syllabus  of 


282  The  Reste  Its  of  Jan  us. 

overlooks  the  fact  withal,  that  if  Bellarmine, 
Suarez,  and  others  held  this  for  a  dogma,  this  was 
their  private  sentiment,  which  could  bind  no  one, 
nor  reduce  the  defenders  of  the  opposite  opinion 
to  silence.  In  the  same  way  as  the  doctrine  of 
Papal  inerrancy  did  not  thereby  become  a  dogma, 
from  the  fact  that  these  theologians  held  it  for 
such,  so  this  is  the  case  also  with  the  doctrine  of 
the  indirect  power.  Not  all  theologians  who  de- 
fend the  former,  advocate  the  latter  also  in  the 
same  degree  ;  very  many  consider  it  only  as  a 
seiitentia  certa,  which  is  very  far  from  being  a 
dogma.  Nay,  even  in  Rome  authors  of  the  highest 
authority  say  precisely,  that  the  doctrine  of  the 
indirect  power  in  temporals  is  no  dogjna.'^^  That 
this  is  not  to  be  inferred  from  the  Bull  of  Pope 


1864,  cites,  at  p.  18,  a  passage  from  the  Manual  of  Canon  Law  by  the 
Jesuite  Tarquini,  printed  in  Rome  with  a  triple  approbation.  The 
passage  runs  as  follows  : —  "In  temporal  affairs,  and  with  regard  to 
temporal  objects,  the  Church  has  no  power  in  civil  society.  Thence 
it  follows,  that  civil  society,  even  when  consisting  entirely  of 
Catholics,  is  not  subordinated  to  the  Church,  but  is  completely 
independent  of  it.  .  .  .  In  things  in  which  the  aim  of  civil  society, 
directly  or  accidentally  (per  se  vel  per  accidens),  comes  into  collision 
with  the  object  of  the  Church,  that  is  to  say,  with  the  salvation  of 
souls,  and  with  eternal  life,  there  must  temporal  prosperity,  or  the 
aim  of  civil  society,  be  postponed  to  the  salvation  of  souls,  and  to 
eternal  life,  that  is  to  say,  to  the  object  of  the  Church."  To  this 
the  author  of  the  Introduction  subjoins — "Whoso,  indeed,  does 
not  believe  in  the  value  of  the  immortal  soul,  nor  in  hell,  will  find 
it  foolish  that  eternal  life,  when  it  cannot  be  purchased  otherwise 
than  by  the  surrender  of  an  earthly  advantage,  should  require  and 
deserve  the  sacrifice  of  the  latter.  But  if  Catholics,  who  are  no 
unbelievers,  hold  the  opinion  that  the  ijidependence  of  each  of  the 
tivo  powers  should  not  be  pushed  to  the  essential  detriment  of  ecclesias- 
tical authority,  so  no  one,  without  offending  against  the  laws  of 
logic,  can  represent  this  view  as  a  denial  of  the  independence  of 
the  state." 

^  Bianchi,  op.  cit.,  L.  i,,  §  19,  n.  6,  p.  166  ;  §  21,  n.  i,  p.  184. 
Gosselin  II.,  p.  293,  294,  with  the  authors  cited  in  note  2.  Cf. 
Card.  Sfondrat.  Gall.  Vind.  Diss,  ii.,  §  ii.,  seq.  Phillips'  Canon 
Law,  ii.,  §  116,  p.  627. 


The  Reste  Us  of  y  amis.  2  S3 

Boniface  VIII.  we  have  already  seen.  That  the 
interpretation  given  by  the  ablest  theologians,  and 
supported  by  numerous  documents,  would  lead  to 
the  "  ruin  of  all  scientific  dogmatic  theology,"  is  an 
assertion,  indeed,  which  should  be  first  scientifically 
proved.  If  it  really  be  the  case,  as  "Oa^  Allgemeine 
Zeitung ^\.2X^di  in  its  Appendix  of  the  i8th  Novem- 
ber 1869,  that  Doctor  Von  Döllinger  has  com- 
posed these  "  Considerations,''  then  has  he  certainly, 
in  this  pamphlet  at  least,  not  surpassed  his  former 
works,  and  has  not  secured  for  himself  the  predi- 
cate of  "the  greatest  theologian  of  the  presentday." 
Neither  age,  which  of  itself  does  not  protect  from 
errors,  nor  earlier  rendered  services,  which  furnish 
no  charter  to  later  times,  nor  the  distinctions  re- 
ceived from  secular  and  from  ecclesiastical  autho- 
rity, which  do  not  always  promote  Christian 
humility,  can  in  the  learned  world — with  the 
exception  of  some  blind  admirers  and  flatterers, 
whose  existence  has  but  too  clearly  manifested 
itself  in  our  daily  press — exalt  the  author  above 
the  ancient  saying,  "^  tantum  valet,  quantum 
probat,"  he  has  710  further  value  than  his  proofs. 
The  Chureh  of  God  stands  higJier  ifi  our  estimation 
than  a7iy  personage,  howsoever  highly  respeeted. 

But  a  Church  given  up  to  darkness  and  to  cor- 
ruption, forsaken  of  God  in  a  way  as  is  here  more 
gently  insinuated,  and  by  Janus  more  rudely  ex- 
pressed— that  is  no  longer  the  Church  which  the 
Catholic  represents  to  himself,  when  he  says, 
I  believe  in  One,  Holy,  Catholic,  and Apostolie  ChurcJi. 

Yet  an  institution,  which  ages  have  revered  as 
the  holiest  and  the  most  august  in  the  history  of 
the  world,  will  certainly  not,  iDy  newspaper  articles 
and  pamphlets,  be  robbed  of  this  veneration  ;  she 
will  rise  the  higher  in  the  love  of  her  members,  the 
more  impure  is  the  spirit  that  dares  to  assail  her, 


284  The  Results  of  Janus. 

the  more  odious  the  means  which  it  has  employed 
for  that  purpose,  the  more  evident  the  sophistry 
which  it  has  poured  forth.  "  If  a  man  hardeneth 
his  will  against  the  truth,  so  he  hardeneth  thereby 
his  understanding  also."  ^^  This  is  his  affair  ;  he 
may  shoot  forth  arrows  from  the  dark,  they  fall 
back  upon  his  head.  The  Church  of  God  remains 
what  she  was  ;  she  remains  great  amid  the  modern 
heathenism  as  she  was  great  amid  the  old,  in  the 
present  disrupture  of  nations,  as  in  the  early  migra- 
tion of  peoples  ;  and,  unembarrassed  by  all  these 
sophisms  and  misrepresentations,  by  all  these 
calumnies  and  assaults,  millions,  after  many,  many 
years,  will  yet  exclaim  in  Fenelon's  last  words: 
"  O  Roman  Church  !  O  holy  city  !  O  dear  and  com- 
mon home  !'"^° 

Great  historical  antagonisms — questions  which 
ages  scarcely  dared  to  agitate — they  are  to  be  set- 
tled, they  are  to  be  brought  to  a  final  solution  in 
a  time  so  convulsed,  so  diseased,  and  so  tempes- 
tuous as  our  own.  There,  where  the  principle  of 
authority  is  at  stake,  men  have  ventured  to  put 
forth  criminal  hands  in  order  to  debase  in  the  eyes 
of  the  multitude  that  supreme  power,  which,  whether 
they  discern  or  deny  the  fact,  is  a  prop  for  all  other 
authorities ;  to  represent  it  as  built  and  consoli- 
dated on  empty  fraud  ;  to  prepare  the  way  for 
those  who  regard  all  religion  as  nought  else  but 
priestly  craft,  and  the  Deity  itself  as  but  a  "fiction," 
and  thereby  to  undermine  all  the  foundations  of 
moral  and  social  order.  But  what  thrones  are, 
beside  profaned  altars  ;  and  what  kings  are,  be- 
side outraged  priests — this  the  history  of  the 
last  centuries  has  shown  in  legible  characters  ;  this 


2^  In  malevolam  animam  non  introibit  sapientia,  Sap.  i.  4. 
*^  Card.  Bausset  Vie  de  Fenelon,  t.  ii.,  p.  1 70,  seq. 


The  Results  of  Jan  us.  285 

is  shown  by  the  words  and  confessions  of  avowed 
Revolutionists,  a  Proudhon,  a  Victor  Hugo,  a  Louis 
Blanc,  a  Mazzini.  What  the  French  Jansenists,  as 
the  outposts  of  the  Revolution,  sowed,  and  what 
they  reaped,  this  is  known  to  all  the  world.  And 
if  we  would  make  a  survey  of  the  many  congresses 
held  under  various  titles  in  Switzerland,  in  Bel- 
gium, in  Germany,  in  Italy,  in  Spain  ;  and  if  we 
would  submit  to  a  closer  inspection  the  acts  of  the 
last  peace-congress  of  Lausanne,  or  of  the  Inter- 
national Association  of  Labourers  in  Basle  ;  truly 
our  statesmen,  our  scholars,  and  educated  classes 
would  find  matter  for  the  most  serious  reflections, 
and  could  trace  the  approach  of  a  storm,  which  to 
them,  and  to  their  interests,  would  be  far  more  nox- 
ious than  even  to  those  of  the  Church.  In  this 
way  to  render  good  service  to  the  Revolution,  as 
is  done  by  our  modern  Febronians,  appears  still 
the  business  of  short-sighted  men,  who  see  not,  or 
would  fain  not  see,  the  final  result  of  their  policy. 
Wilful  corrupters  of  mankind,  who  push  all  things 
to  the  abyss,  which  widely  gapes  before  a  deluded 
generation,  are  happily  on  the  whole  but  very  rare 
phenomena — the  number  of  the  deluded  is  so 
much  the  greater. 

These  are  the  considerations  which,  on  the 
reading  of  Janus,  have  pressed  themselves  on  my 
mind.  "  The  important  literary  phc7i07nc7ion,  from 
which  the  Ultramontane  party  has  hitherto  timidly 
slunk  away,'"*'  could  not  remain  without  a  decisive 
answer,  and  this  was  to  be  given  as  quickly  as  pos- 
sible. Renouncing  the  statement  of  my  own 
thoughts  and  wishes  in  regard  to  the  Council,  and 
bent  only  on  repelling  the  malicious  assaults 
against  the  Apostolic  See, — assaults  which  by  no 

*i  Allgemeine  Zeitung,  24th  October  1869. 


286  The  Results  of  James, 

exaggerations  and  one-sided  views  of  particular 
individuals,  however  lamentable  they  may  be,  can 
in  any  way  be  justified  ; — I  enter  a  solemn  protest 
■against  this  book  of  Janus  in  the  interest  of  science, 
which  has  been  here  utterly  abused,  as  well  as  in 
the  interest  of  the  Church,  which  has  been  shame- 
fully outraged  ;  while  at  the  same  time,  mankind 
at  large  are  but  ill  served  by  sophistries  and  mis- 
representations. However  troubled  the  relations 
of  the  present  times  may  be,  I  faint  not,  I  despair 
not,  of  Christian  nations,  to  whom  God's  merciful- 
ness hath  not  denied  the  cure  even  of  grievous 
maladies,"^^  nor  do  I  despair  of  the  final  triumph  of 
justice,  which  is  everlasting  and  immortal."^"  I  con- 
fide in  the  power  of  divine  truth,  which  strengthens 
faith,  which  purifies  knowledge,  which  vivifies  love, 
which  secures  unity  in  the  bond  of  peace.  I 
believe  in  One,  Holy,  Catholic,  and  Apostolic 
Church. 

^2  Sanabiles  fecit  nationes  orbis  terrarum.      Sap.  i.  14. 
^3  Justitia  enim  perpetua  est  et  immortalis.     Sap,  i.  15. 


•^tH' 


ie-T,*.'«^, 


m 


APPENDIX. 


Testimonies  of  Distinguished  German  Protestant  Histo- 
rians, in  favour  of  the  Moral  and  Political  Influence  of 
the  Popes  and  Bishops  of  the  Middle  Age,  referred  to  at 
Chapter  lo,  p.  217  {Germa7i). 

Many  years  ago,  I  appended  the  present  note  to  my  Tran- 
slation of  Frederick  Schlegel's  "Philosophy  of  History." 
It  was  suggested  by  the  remark  of  that  Catholic  writer, 
that  eminent  German  Protestants  had  had  the  merit  of 
dispelling  many  modern  prejudices  as  to  the  political 
umpirage  exercised  by  the  Popes  in  mediaeval  times. 
When  I  made  these  quotations  for  the  benefit  of  my 
Protestant  countrymen,  I  little  thought  that  I  should 
have  ever  had  occasion  of  using  them  against  pseudo- 
Catholics,  like  the  writers  of  Janus._  These,  by  their 
gross  misrepresentations  and  calumnies  uttered  against 
the  Papacy,  have  not  only  outraged  the  feelings  of  all 
Catholics,  but  even  run  counter  to  the  sentiments  of  the 
most  learned  and  impartial  of  their  own  Protestant 
fellow-countrymen. — (Tra?is.) 

To  show  my  readers  the  enlarged  and  enlightened 
views  taken  by  the  Protestant  writers  of  that  country  on 
the  political  influence  of  the  Papacy  in  the  Middle  Age, 
and  on  the  services  which  at  that  momentous  period  the 
hierarchy  rendered  to  the  cause  of  social  order,  liberty, 


288  Appendix, 

and  civilization,  it  were  easy  to  transcribe  matter  more 
than  sufficient  to  fill  a  volume.  Let  a  few  examples 
suffice  : — 

"  '  The  northern  nations,'  says  the  celebrated  historian 
of  Switzerland,  John  von  Müller,  '  rushing  in  upon  the 
most  beautiful  countries  of  Europe,  trampling  under  foot 
or  disturbing  and  convulsing  all  social  institutions,  men- 
aced the  whole  western  world  with  a  barbarism  similar  to 
that  which,  under  the  Ottoman  sceptre,  has  obliterated 
everything  good,  great,  and  beautiful  that  ancient  Greece 
and  Asia  had  produced.  Yet  the  Bishops  and  other 
dignitaries  (Vorsteher)  of  the  Church,  strong  in  their 
authority,  contrived  to  impose  a  restraint  on  those 
giants  of  the  north,  who  as  regards  intelligence  were  but 
children.  They  would  not  have  been  more  successful 
than  the  Greek  prelates,  had  they  been  subject  to  four 
different  patriarchs.  The  Popes  of  Rome  (whose  primi- 
tive history  is  as  obscure  and  defective  as  that  of  the 
ancient  Roman  Republic,  since  we  know  little  of  the 
first  Popes,  except  that  they  devoted  their  lives  for  the 
faith,  as  Decius  had  done  for  his  country) ; — the  Popes, 
we  say,  with  the  same  address  which  we  admire  in  the 
ancient  Senate,  to  render  their  see  independent,  subject 
to  its  immediate  action  the  whole  western  hierarchy,  and 
establish  its  sway  far  beyond  the  boundaries  of  the  ancient 
Empire  on  the  ruins  of  the  northern  religions.  Thus, 
whoever  refused  to  honour  the  Christ,  trembled  before 
the  Pope;  and  one  faith  and  one  Church  were  preserved 
in  Europe  amid  the  breaking  up  and  subdivision  of  the 
newly-founded  kingdoms  into  a  thousand  petty  princi- 
palities. We  know  what  Pope  made  Charlemagne  the 
first  Emperor ;  but  who  made  the  first  Pope  ?  The  Pope^ 
they  say,  was  on/y  a  Bishop.  Yes;  but  at  the  same  time 
the  Holy  Father,  the  Sovereign  Pojitiff,^  the  great  Caliph 
(as  he  was  called  by  Ho-Albufreda,  Prince  of  Hamath), 
of  all  the  kingdoms  and  principaUties,  of  all  the  lordships 
and  cities  of  the  west.  It  is  he  who  controlled  by  the 
fear  of  God  the  stormy  youth  of  our  modern  states.  At 
present  even,  when  his  authority  is  no  longer  formidable, 
he  is  still  very  puissant  by  the  benedictions  which  he 


i 


Appendix.  289 

showers ;  he  is  still  an  object  of  veneration  to  innume- 
rable hearts,  honoured  by  the  kings  who  honour  the 
nations,  invested  with  a  power,  before  which,  in  the  long 
succession  of  ages,  from  the  Coesars  to  the  House  of 
Hapsburg,  a  host  of  nations  and  all  their  great  names 
have  vanished,' 

*'  *  We  declaim  against  the  Pope,  as  if  it  were  such  a 
misfortune  that  there  should  exist  an  authority  to  super- 
intend the  practice  of  Christian  morality,  and  to  say  to 
ambition  and  to  despotism,  '  Halt !  so  far  and  no  further  ! 
Bisher  und  nicht  weiter  !'  So  speaks  the  illustrious  John 
von  Müller. 

"The  celebrated  Herder  allows,  'that  without  the 
Hierarchy,  Europe  in  all  probability  had  become  the  prey 
of  tyrants,  the  theatre  of  eternal  wars,  or  even  a  desert.' 

"'The  Hierarchy,'  says  Beck,  'opposed  the  progress 
of  despotism  in  Europe,  preserved  the  elements  of 
civilization,  and  upheld  in  the  recollection  of  men,  what 
is  so  easily  effaced — the  ties  which  bind  earth  to  heaven. 
Those  ignorant  men,  as  we  affect  to  call  them,  have 
settled  almost  all  the  countries  of  Europe.  The  fruits  of 
that  time  are  the  formation  of  the  third  estate,  whence 
dates  the  true  existence  of  nations,  and  the  establishment 
of  cities,  wherein  social  life  and  true  liberty  were  de- 
veloped.'— Beck  on  the  Middle  Jge,  p.  13.  Leipzic, 
1824. 

"  '  The  weak,'  says  Riihs,  in  his  '  Manual  of  the 
History  of  the  Middle  Age,'  'then  found  in  spiritual 
authority  a  better  protection  against  the  encroachments 
of  the  powerful  than  afterwards  in  the  so-called  balance 
of  power — a  system,  which  as  it  was  a  f/iing  purely 
abstract^  dez'oid  of  all  external  guarantee,  must  soon  have 
lost  all  influence.  The  Pope  was  always  present  to 
terminate  the  wars,  which  had  broken  out  among  Chris- 
tian princes,  and  to  protect  the  people  against  the  in- 
justice and  tyranny  of  their  rulers.  The  Clergy,  there- 
fore, everywhere  showed  themselves  opposed  to  the 
power  of  kings,  when  the  latter  wished  to  become 
perfectly  absolute.  They  wished  not  to  domineer  over 
them,  but  to  confine  them  within  the  legitimate  bounds 

T 


290  Appendix. 

of  their  authority.  The  priesthood  were,  consequently, 
always  for  princes,  when  vassals  attacked  the  rights  of 
the  sovereign.  They  were  the  natural  and  constant 
guardians  of  the  rights  and  liberty  of  all  classes.' — 
Manual  of  the  History  of  the  Middle  Age.  1816. — 
Tra7is.)'' 

Vide  Frederick  Schlegel's  "  Philosophy  of  History," 
translated  by  myself,  Bohn's  edition,  p.  361.  Seventh 
edition,  1859.     Bell  &  Daldy,  London. 


INDEX  NOMINUM  ET  RERUM. 


The  Figures  denote  the  Pncj^e. 


Acacian  Schism,  65,  136. 
Agatho,  P.,  60,  128. 
Alexander  III.,  P.,  23. 
Alexander  VII.,  P.,  91. 
Allgeyneine   Zeitung,    i,    70,   et  pas- 
sim. 
Ambrose,  St,  96. 
Arian  Heresy,  136. 
Armenian  Church,  141. 
Athanasius,  St,  112,  seq. 
Attrition,  92. 

Augustine,  St,  67,  77,  96  Jn.  3},  130. 
Austria,  40. 

Baius,  91. 

Baptism,  Infant,  76. 

Basil,  St,  114,  seg. 

Basle,  Council  of,  199, 

Bavaria,  5,  39. 

Benedict  XIII.,  Anti-P.,  18. 

Benedict  XIV.,  P.,  55. 

Bernard,  St,  100. 

Bishops,  260. 

Bonaventure,  St,  99,  100. 

Bull,  "Auctorem  Fidei,"2. 

Bull,  "  Cum  ex  Apostolatus  Officio," 

256. 
Bull,  "  In  Coena  Domini,"  257, 
Bull,  "  Unam  Sanctam,"  7,  203,  seq. 
Bull,  "  Pastor  internus,"  202. 

Capemaite  Doctrine,  85. 

Celestine  III.,  P.,  85. 

Chalcedon,  Council  of,   124,  127,  138, 

147- 
Charlemagne,  156. 
Chrysologus,  St,  67. 
Chrysostom,  St,  97,  130. 
Church,  3,  4,.  240,  seq. 
Civüta,  Cattolica,  i,  seq.,  10,  15. 
Clement,  P.,  109. 


Concordat  with  S.  America,  35.' 
Confirmation  of  Councils,  124,  159. 
Congress  of  Basle,  7. 
Constantine,  Emp.,  146. 
Constantinople,  See  of,  138. 
Constitutum,  Sylvestri,  149. 
Convocation  of  Councils,  120,  seq. 
CuUen,  Card.,  17  (n  3;. 
Curia,  9,  72,  226,  seq. 
Cypnan,  St,  in. 
Cyrill,  St,  117,  et  n. 

Damascene,  St  John,  96. 

Dante,  70. 

Decretals  of  Pseudo-Isidore,  64,  158. 

Decretum  of  Gratian,  170,  seq. 

De  la  Mennais,  24. 

De  Maistre,  24. 

Dionysius,  P.,  112. 

Dionysius  Exiguus,  133. 

Dollinger,  59,  106,  283. 

Donation  of  Constantine,  155,  156. 

Düsseldorf,  Cath.  Assembly  of,  7. 

Emile  Ollivier,  259. 

Emperors,  120. 

Ephesus,  Latrocinium  of,  120,  123. 

Eugenius,  IV.  P.,  88  seq.,  181. 

Eutychian  Heresy,  135. 

Fabian,  P.,  no. 

Filioque,  181. 

Florence,  Council  of,  179  &  (n.   109), 

202. 
Forgeries,  144,  seq. 
Francis  of  Sales,  St,  19. 
Franks,  Epistle  to  the,  157. 
Frohschammer,  21  (n.  14).  244 
Fulda,  Bps.  assembled  at,  7. 

Gelasius,  P.,  132,  133,  150. 


292 


Index. 


General  Councils,  186,  seq. 
GestaXysti,  III.,  150. 
Gratian,   170,  seq. 
Gregory  the  Great,  139. 
Gregory  VII.  P.,  167,  192,  218. 

Hegesippus,  109. 
Heretics,  177  (n  105). 
Historisch-Politische  Blätter,  11. 
Honorius,  P.,  79. 
Hormisdas,  P.,  65,  153. 
Hugo  of  St  Victor,  loi. 
Hyacinthe,  Pere,  7. 

Immaculate  Conception,  19. 
Infallibility,   Papal,   16,  20,  seq.  :  50. 

seq.:  281,  seq. 
Innocent  I.,  P.,  117  et  n .,  132,  135. 
Innocent  III.,  P.,  87. 
Innocent  X.,  92. 
Inquisition,  236. 
Irenaeus,  St,  108. 

James  I.,  King  of  England,  23,  278. 

Jansenism,  92,  241. 

Janus,  14,  25,  69,  et  Passim. 

Jerome,  St,  96  (n.  4). 

Jesuits,  I,  5,  8,  20,  33,  69. 

John  XXII.,  P.,  87. 

Joseph,  St,  18. 

Julius,  P.,  74,  160  [n  44^. 

Justinian,  II.,  Emp.,  66,  124. 

La  Luzerne,  Card.,  24. 

Lateran,  First  General  Council  of,  192. 

Lateran,  Second  General  Council  of, 

193- 
Lateran  Council,  Fifth,  202. 
Latrocinium  of  Ephesus,  189. 
Leo  I.,  P  ,  121,  135. 
Leo  X  ,  P.,  210. 
Liber  Pontificalis,  154. 
Liberius,  P.,  75,  114. 
Lyons,  First  General  Council  of,  193, 

seq. 

Magna  Charta  of  England,  35. 
Manning,  Abp.,  17  (n.  3). 
Marcellus  of  Ancyra,  74. 
Martin  V.,  P.,  28,  198. 
Melchior,   Canus,  53. 
Meletius  of  Antioch,  136. 
Middle  A^es,  44. 
Monothelitism,  79. 

Nicsea,  General  Council  of,  188. 


Nicholas  I.,  P.,  83,  12S,  162,  seq. 
Nicholas  II.,  P.,  85. 
Nicholas  III.,  P.,  87,  88. 


Oaks,  Synod  of  the,  189. 
Oecumenical  Councils,  2, 


143- 


Paul  III.,  P.,  24. 

Pelagiusl.,  P.,  68. 

Pepin,  King  of  France,  157. 

Peter,  St,  61,  seq.;  97,  138,  140. 

Phillips,  118,  132. 

Pichler,  51. 

Pisa,  Council  of,  196. 

Pius  IX.,  P.,  258,  seq. 

Photius,  130. 

Polycarp,  St,  109. 

Popes,   2,  67,   71,   94,   seq.:   120,   131, 

217,  seq. 
Presidency  of  Councils,  122. 
Primacy,  108,  seq. 
Probabilism,  20. 
Pseudo-Isidore,    130,    138,    145,    158, 

seq. 

Sardica,  Council  of,  117  etn.,  129. 
Schneemann,  17  (n.  2),  31. 
Schrader,  S.  J.,  33. 
Sinuessa,  Pretended  Synod  of,  149. 
Siricius,  P.,  132,  135. 
Sixtus  V.,"P  ,  91. 
Soter,  P.,  no. 
Stephen  II.,  P  ,  83. 
Stephen  III.,  P.,  128,  156. 
Supremacy,  Papal,  95,  seq. 
Syllabus,  15,  18,  27,  seq. 
Syncellus,  Office  of,  170. 

Tertullian,  64. 
Theodoret,  P.,  67. 
Thomas  Aquinas,  St,  176. 
Tradition,  253. 
Tractoria  of  P.  Zosimus,  78. 
Trent,  Council  of,  4,  210,  seq. 
Trullo,  Council  in,  125-130. 
Tyana,  Council  of,  116. 

Victor,  P.,  no. 
Vigilius,  P.,  78,  121. 
Virgin  Mary,  19. 

Westphalia,  Treaty  of,  34. 
Witchcraft,  237. 

Zosimus,  P.,  77,  isi,  et  n. 


PP.INTKD  BY  W.   B.    KELLY,  8  GRAFTON  STREET,  DUBLIN. 


8  Grafton  Stref.t,  Dublin, 
December  i,  1870. 


BOOKS  PUBLISHED  and  OTHERS  IN  QUANTITY 
KEPT  IN  STOCK 

BY 

W.   B.    KELLY. 


THE    IRISH     ECCLESIASTICAL    RECORD  :    A    Monthly 

Journal,  conducted  by  a  Society  of  Clerg^'inen,  under  Episcopal  Sanction. 
Now  in  its  sixth  year  of  publication.  Vol.  vi.,  1869.  Imprimatur  Paulus 
Cardinalis  CuUen,  Archiepiscopus  Dublinensis.     Terms  for  Great  Britain, 

jer  annum,  6s.  ;   by  post,  7s. — Payable  in  Advance.     Single  Copy,  8d.  : 

)y  post,  gd. 


r. 


THE  DIRECTORIUM  ASCETICUM  ;  or,  Guide  to  the 
Spiritual  Life.  By  John  Baptist  Scaramelli,  S.J.  Translated  from 
the  Italian,  and  edited  at  .Saint  Beuno's  College,  North  Wales.  With 
Preface  by  His  Grace  the  Archbishop  of  Westminster.  6s.,  crown  8vo, 
cloth  neat,  vol.  i.,  or  by  post,  6s.  6d.  To  be  completed  in  4  vols,  early  in 
Spring  1870. 


COLLECTIO  OMNIUM   CONCLUSIONUM   ET   RESOLU- 

TIONUM,  qua;  in  causis  propositis  apud  sacram  congregationem  cardi- 
nalium  S.  Concilii  tridentini  interpretum  prodieruiit  ab  ejus  institutione 
anno  mdlxiv.  ad  annum  mdccclx.,  distinclis  titulis  alphabetico  ordine 
per  materias  digesta  cura  et  studio  Salvatoris  Pailottini  s.  theologiae  doc- 
toris  et  in  Romana  curia  advocati. 

A  ssocin  tion  is  conditiones. 

I.  Hoc  Opus  Quindecim  Voluminibus  constabit  quae  Folio  LXXX.  seu 
paginas  640  in-4  duabus  distinctas  coiumnis  continebunt  atque  in  X  Fasciculos 
distribuentur  paginas  LXIV  complectentes. 

II.  Unoquoque  mense  unus  vel  duo  Fasciculi  prodibunt:  I  et  II  jam  prodie- 
runt. 

III.  Solventur  pro  singulis  Fasciculis  2  25.  Vol  i.  now  ready,  24s.  In  half 
ellum. 


DE   LUGO    (JOHANIS,    SJ.)   DISPUTATIONES    SCHOL- 

ASTICiE  ET  MORALES.     Eight  Tomes,  4to,  sewed,  just  completed, 
;^6,  or  Cash  £4,  ids.     Paris,  1869. 


BIBLIOTH^QUE  DES   PREDICATEURS  (la)  (Reimpression 

du  grand  et  magnifique  ouvrage  du  R.  P.  Vincent  Houdry,  de  la  Com- 

pagnie  de  Jesus).     Environ  18  vol.  grand  in-8,  de  700  ä  800  pages.     H 

parait  un  volume  tous  les  deux  mois.— Seize  volumes  sont  en  vente.     Prix 

de  chaque  volume,  nett,  5s.,  or  for  cash,  4s.  6d. 

Cet  ouvrage  est,  sans  contredit,  le  plus  riche  et  le  plus  solide  recueil  que  nous 

possedions  sur  less  matieres  de  la  predication.     Aussi,  la  reimpression  en  a-t-elk 

ete  encouragee  par  NN.  SS.  eveques,  et,  il  y  a  quelque  temps,  le  R.  P.  Mann 

de  Boylesve,  excellent  juge  en  pareille  matiere,  ecrivait  a  I'editeur.     TAis  work 

is  noiv  completed. 

A  TREATISE   ON  THE   KNOWLEDGE   AND  LOVE   OF 

JESUS  CHRIST.  Translated  from  the  French  by  Father  Saint  Jure, 
S.J.  With  an  original  Sketch  of  the  Author,  by  a  member  of  the  Order 
of  Mercy.     Now  ready,  in  3  vols.  Svo,  cloth,  691  pages,  £\,  iis.  6d. 


KUHNER'S    ELEMENTARY    GREEK    GRAMMAR   AND 

EXERCISES,  translated,  with  Greek-English  and  English-Greek  Lexi- 
con. By  C.  W.  Bateman,  LL.B.,  Scholar,  Trinity  College.  i2mo, 
bound,  663  pages,  6s.  6d.     Key  to  the  Exercise  in  same,  2s.  6d. 


LIVES  OF  THE  ENGLISH  SAINTS  ;  Projected  and  partly 
Edited  by  the  Very  Rev.  John  Henry  Newman,  and  others,  of  the 
Oxford  School,  original  editions,  published  by  Mr  Toovey,  of  London, 
viz.  : — 

ST  AUGUSTINE  OF  CANTERBURY,  Apostle  of  the  English, 

and  his  companions,  St  Mellitus,  St  Lawrence,  St  Peter,  St  Justus,  and 
St  Honorius ;  together  with  some  Account  of  the  Early  British  Church. 
2  vols,  in  one,  cloth,  elegant,  3s.  6d. 


ST  GERMAN,  Bishop  of  Auxerre,  in  Burgundy.     2  vols,  in  one, 
cloth,  elegant,  3s.  6d. 


STEPHEN    LANGTON,    Archbishop    of  Canterbury.       i2mo, 
cloth,  elegant,  2s.  6d. 


LECTURES  ON  SOME  SUBJECTS  OF  MODERN  HIS- 
TORY AND  BIOGRAPHY ;  History  of  Spain '  in  the  Eighteenth 
Century.  Religious  and  Political  Institutions  of  Spain.  Reply  to  Mr 
Buckle's  Civilisation  in  Spain.  Life,  Writings,  and  Times  ot  Chateau- 
briand. Secret  Societies  of  Modern  Times,  viz.  :— Freemasons,  the 
lUuminati,  the  Carbonari,  the  Jacobins,  St  Simonians,  Socialists,  &c. 
Papal  Legislation  on  Secret  Societies.  Delivered  at  the  Catholic 
University  of  Ireland,  i860  to  1864.  By  J.  B.  Robertson,  Esq., 
Professor  of  Modern  History  ;  Translator  of  Schlegel's  "Philosophy  of 
History,"  Moehler's.  "Symbolism,"  &c.  Crown  8vo,  cloth  extra,  over 
500  pages.     6s. 


THE  LIFE  OF  FATHER  DE  RAVIGNAN,  of  The  Society 

OF  Jesus.     From  the  French  of  Father  de  Ponlevoy,  Translated  at  St 
Beuno's  College,  North  Wales.     Crown  8vo,  710  pages,  cloth,  elegant,  9s. 


THE   INNER   LIFE   OF   THE  VERY  REVEREND  pfeRE 

LACORDAIRE,  of  the  Order  of  Preachers.  Translated  from  the  French 
of  the  Rev.  Pere  Chocakne,  O.P.  (with  the  Author's  permission). 
By  a  Religious  of  the  same  Order.  With  Preface  by  the  Very  Rev. 
Father  Aylwakd,  Prior-Provincial  of  England.  Post  8vo,  gilt  edges, 
7s.  6d. 

SERMONS  ON  SUBJECTS  OF  THE  DAY  (with  Portrait  of 

the  Rev.  Father  Burke,  Order  of  Preachers),  delivered  by  Distinguished 
^  Prelates  and  Theologians,  at  the  Second  Plenary  Council  of  Baltimore, 

United  States,  October  1866 ;  together  with  the  Papal  Rescript  and 
Letters  of  Convocation,  &c.  To  which  is  added  the  FUNERAL  ORA- 
TION ON  O  CONNELL,  pronounced  by  Father  Thomas  Burke,  O.P., 
at  Glasnevin  Cemetery,  County  Dublin,  in  May  1869,  on  the  occasion  of 
the  removal  of  the  remains  of  Ireland's  Liberator  to  their  final  resting- 
place  ;  and  Sermon  on  the  SOLEMN  TRIDUUM.  Second  Edition. 
Crown  8vo,  boards,  neat,  250  pages,  price  2s.,  by  post  4d.  extra. 

The  Volume  contains  Sermons  by 

Most  Rev.  M.  J.  Spalding,  D.D.,  Archbishop  of  Baltimore. 

Most  Rev.  John  M'Losky,  D.D.,  Archbishop  of  New  York. 

Most  Rev.  John  B.  Purcell,  D  D.,  Archbishop  of  Cincinnatti. 

Most  Rev.  P.  R.  Ke.nkick,  D.D.,  Archbishop  of  St  Louis. 

Right  Rev.  P.  N.  Lynch,  D.D.,  Bishop  of  Charleston. 

Right  Rev.  S.  H.  Rosecrans,  D.D.,  Au.x.  Bishop  of  Cincinnatti. 

Right  Rev.  James  Roosevelt  Baylev,  D.D.,  Bishop  of  Newark. 

Right  Rev.  W.M.  H.  Elder,  D.D.»  Bishop  of  Natchez. 

Right  Rev.  James  Frederick  Wood,  D.D.,  Bishop  of  Philadelphia. 

Right  Rev.  John  M'Gill,  D.D.,  Bishop  of  Richmond. 

Right  Rev.  Ja.mes  Duggan,  D.D.,  Bishop  of  Chicago. 

Very  Rev.  J.  T.  Hecker,  Superior  of  the  Paulists. 

Rev.  J.  L.  Spalding,  S.T.L.,  of  Louisville. 

Rev.  P.  J.  Ryan,  of  St  Louis. 

Rev.  Father  Burke,  Order  of  Preachers. 


THE  FATHERS,  HISTORIANS,  AND  WRITERS  OF  THE 
CHURCH,  Literally  Translated :  being  Extracts  from  the  Christian 
Classes.     i2mo,  cloth  extra,  4s.  6d. 

Contents. 

Sulpicius  Severus.  St  Augustine. 

Eusebius.  St  Jerome. 

Acts  of  the  Apostles.  Tertuliian. 

Socrates.  St  Eucherius. 

Sozomen.  Salvian. 

Theodoret.  St  Bernard. 

Minutius  Felix.  St  Chrysostom. 

St  Cyprian.  St  Basil. 

Lactantius.  St  Gregory  Nazianzen. 

St  Ambrose.  St  Gregory  of  Nyssa. 

"A  useful  Manual  for  those  who  would  attain  to  a  general  acquaintance  with 
the  early  Christian  writers." — AtJienceum. 
*J'  For  recommendatioa  of  this  work  see  Irish  Ecclesiastical  Record. 


4 
A  GENERAL  HISTORY  OF  THE  CATHOLIC  CHURCH, 

from  the  commencement  of  the  Christian  Era  until  the  present  time.  By 
M.  L'Abbe  Darras.  With  Introduction  and  Notes  by  the  Most  Rev. 
Dr  Spalding,  D.D.,  Archbishop  of  Baltimore.  4  vols,  royal  8vo,  cloth, 
plates,  £2,  8s.  ;  for  cash,  £-2,  2s.  nett. 


CATHOLIC   PRAYER  BOOKS,    with   Epistles  and   Gospels, 

elegantly  printed    in    48mo.      Bound    in    various    styles,   viz.  : — Ivory, 
Morocco,  Russia,  Calf,  Cape,  and  Cloth,  from  6d.  tO;^i,  is.  each. 

\*  A  large  assortment  of  Prayer  Books  in  English,  French,  Gernlan,.  Italian, 
and  Spanish  Languages.     Various  styles  of  binding  and  prices. 


IRISH  VARIETIES  ;  or,  Ireland's  History  made  Inter- 
esting. From  Ancient  and  Modern  Sources  and  Original  Documents. 
Containing  an  Historical,  Antiquarian,  and  Anecdotal  Description  of  the 
South-East  Coast  of  the  Bay  and  Counties  of  Dublin  and  Wicklow,  viz.  : 
— Dalkey,  Dunleary,  Kingstown,  Killiney,  Shanganagh,  Bullock,  Bray, 
and  the  Rochestown  Hills.  With  four  Illustrations  in  Chromo-lithograph, 
drawn  by  B.  Nye.  To  which  is  added  the  only  complete  account  ever 
published  of  the  Mock  "  Kingdom  of  Dalkey,"  its  Revels  and  Re-Unions 
in  the  last  Century.  By  J.  J.  Gaskin,  Author  of  "A  Memoir  of  Lord 
Carlisle."     Crown  8vo,  cloth  neat,  price  6s.,  by  post,  6s.  6d. 

"  It  would  not  perhaps  be  more  difficult  for  a  stranger  with  only  half-a-day 
at  his  disposal  to  make  himself  acquainted  with  the  many  and  striking  beauties 
of  the  places  in  the  neighbourhood  of  Dublin,  Dalkey,  Killiney,  Howth,  Bray, 
Shanganagh,  and  others,  than  it  is  for  a  revie\Ver  with  only  a  few  lines  at  his 
disposal  to  discuss  the  very  multifarious  attractions  of  a  book  like  Mr  Gaskin's 
Irish  Varieties.  It  professes  to  deal  with  the  Historical,  Topographical,  and 
Archaeological  associations  of  the  places  enumerated  ;  but  the  word  association 
has  to  be  taken  In  a  very  large  sense,  if  it  is  to  embrace,  as  by  right,  all  the 
topics  contained  in  these  entertaining  pages.  We  can  only  wish  it  every  success, 
as  it  certainly  deserves." — The  Month. 


THE  SHAM   SQUIRE:   The  Rebellion  in  Ireland,  and 

Informers   of    1798.      By  William  J.    Fitzpatrick,   Biographer  of 
Bishop   Doyle,    Lord   Cloncurry,    Lady   Morgan,   "Ireland  before   the 
Union,"  &c. 
%*  Eighth  Thousand,  with  many  additions  and  recent  revelations,  valuable 

hitherto  unpublished  documents,  and  illustrations  from  contemporary  portraits. 

Post  Svo,  boards,  2s.  6d.,  or  by  post,  2s.  lod. 


DUBLIN  :  W.  B.  KELLY,  8  GRAFTON  STREET. 


336 


1 1«,'^'  irw'    "^1  vp  "  J" 


